Go Left, Lefty

Article Posted at Salon.com by David Sirota 11/10/08

Obama, be progressive!
Voters want you to go big and go liberal -- and not channel Clinton-style incrementalism.
By David Sirota [2008-11-08]

Lord Please, Please, Please let this happen! Then Obama and His loony supporters will see just how center right our nation is......

Where we go now

Well the election is over and I finally collected my thoughts enough to comment. Unlike many I am not fearful what is going to happen because I already have an idea where we are headed and I am preparing for it. So Indulge me;

Obama is going to find it difficult to make good on any of his promises given the deepening financial problems in this country. His first two years will produce little or nothing, he will spend it dodging anything that will tarnish his reputation and hyping the few menial accomplishments that he can get enacted. At the same time he will be just like Bill Clinton was, in a continual campaign mode for 2012.

Pelosi and Reid will drag him to left on every domestic issue. The offshore drilling ban will be reenacted and gas prices will rise. They will throw more money into the market in vain attempts to stem the looming credit crisis which will set the table for zero growth, stagflation, double digit unemployment and a deep recession.

I don't see them having the stones to raises taxes overtly by legislative act, but they will allow the tax cuts Bush passed to expire in 2010. These will result in high tax rates for every taxpayer either directly or indirectly. This alone will hurt any chance of seeing an economic upturn by 2012.

The DOD, JCS and General Petraeus will drag him to the right on Iraq and Iran. He will find himself in a peculiar spot of having to privately admit to himself that Bush was correct once he is exposed to the same intelligence. This is the point the Anti War types will turn against him. He will not withdraw from Iraq and be forced by conscience to expand the conflict in Afghanistan.

Throughout all of this the democrats will continue to blame every new crisis on the Bush Administration, but by 2010 that line will be threadbare given they are in complete control. And all those unmarried women that voted in droves for Obama, will begin to question him once they loose their jobs and their "hope", and begin to see for the first time "real change".

Right now we are a country with a weakening economy and a strong President. On January 20th 2009, we will be a a country with a weaker economy and an untested novice as a President. A very dangerous combination. Imagine these very possible scenarios;

The Israelis having no faith in the United States, attack Iran with a Nuclear weapon.

Putin makes good on the rumors, recaptures governmental control of the Russian Federation and embarks on an expansionist spree, invading the Ukraine.

Hugo Chavez makes a bid to expand his control into Cuba or sees a window to strike at the Columbians.

Kim Jong Il is found to be dead and that the North Korean military is in control. Japan strikes them touching off a firestorm with the Chinese.

Tensions between Pakistan and the US sour further and reignite long standing issues between themselves and India...... The list is endless.

Just one of these would worsen economic troubles in this nation, two or more could destroy it. If the actions taken by the Oval Office are perceived as weak or ineffective. It would embolden other enemies of this nation to make provocative moves seeing that the United States was too weakened to intervene.

Horrible as these seem, there are two others that would be worse in my opinion because they would directly lead to lose of American lives.

First, Imagine this news bulletin in the next year or so "President Obama assassinated by white man from Alabama". The ensuing racial and political outrage could possibly ignite the bloodiest days this nation has seen since the Civil War at worst, or at best cement such polarization into the national political fabric that blood could be the only long term recourse.

Lastly, Let us not forget that we have a very patient and very dangerous foe intently observing our every move. And what better way to destroy the "Great Satan" then to aid in its own self destruction. Suppose if, just if, Hamas, Hezbollah, or Al Queda were the ones behind the aforementioned assassination. Playing off the racial tensions of nation in order to achieve their goal of marginalizing this nations dwindling influence. Throw in major attack on LA and the seeds of our nations destruction would be sown.

I used to think that this nation could absorb a direct attack against it, Tuesday confirmed in me its less likely to. It wasn't an election, it was an episode of American Idol. It wasn't won by the one with the most qualifications, but the one that had the most public appeal, and the best press agents. It was the culmination of years of exposure to the "Hollywood Culture". Popularity and style over chracter and substance.

It confirmed in me just how devoid of commonsense and patience, how spoiled, and how intellectually lazy this nation has become. And just how few Americans know and understand what a gift was given to us by the men who wrote the Constitution and the untold millions that have defended it sense.

Ask yourself, when is the last time you read it, can you still recite its Preamble? Do you even know what a Preamble is? Ask your children the same, the answer will frighten you. But now is not the time for fear, now is the time to prepare and be informed.

Until we as a nation can understand and defend the core values instilled into it by those who founded it, this downward spiral will continue. And, "a nation of the people, for the people, and by the people" will become nothing but words spoken by some guy a long time ago.

There are 65 million of us may not understand that, the good news is that 57 million of us who do. At a campaign stop Obama challenged his supporters to "get vocal to speak out", notice he never asked them educate themselves before doing so.

My challenge is just that, educate yourself, read "our" Constitution, don't rely on people to interpret it for you. Learn "our" history from those who made it, Adams, Jefferson, Washington, Hamilton, Madison, Lincoln, not from a historian who maybe attempting to rewrite it.

Do this and decide for yourself if we have lost our way. Hopefully you will see just how intelligent and forward thinking our Founding Fathers were. It is difficult to know we aren't heading the right direction if you don't know what that direction is.

And finally when the next election comes, vote, vote your concious. Let me ask you, are you so busy that you can't exercise the most important right that you have. We shouldn't have to be told or bribed with free mechandise, we should view it as our solemn duty. A duty we shouldn't take lightly, but seriously, and exercised often as required.

The Real Deal

So who is to blame? There's plenty of blame to go around, and it doesn't fasten only on one party or even mainly on what Washington did or didn't do. As The Economist magazine noted recently, the problem is one of "layered irresponsibility ... with hard-working homeowners and billionaire villains each playing a role." Here's a partial list of those alleged to be at fault:

The Federal Reserve, which slashed interest rates after the dot-com bubble burst, making credit cheap.

Home buyers, who took advantage of easy credit to bid up the prices of homes excessively.

Congress, which continues to support a mortgage tax deduction that gives consumers a tax incentive to buy more expensive houses.

Real estate agents, most of whom work for the sellers rather than the buyers and who earned higher commissions from selling more expensive homes.

The Clinton administration, which pushed for less stringent credit and downpayment requirements for working- and middle-class families.

Mortgage brokers, who offered less-credit-worthy home buyers subprime, adjustable rate loans with low initial payments, but exploding interest rates.

Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, who in 2004, near the peak of the housing bubble, encouraged Americans to take out adjustable rate mortgages.

Wall Street firms, who paid too little attention to the quality of the risky loans that they bundled into Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS), and issued bonds using those securities as
collateral.

The Bush administration, which failed to provide needed government oversight of the increasingly dicey mortgage-backed securities market.

An obscure accounting rule called mark-to-market, which can have the paradoxical result of making assets be worth less on paper than they are in reality during times of panic.

Collective delusion, or a belief on the part of all parties that home prices would keep rising
forever, no matter how high or how fast they had already gone up.

The U.S. economy is enormously complicated. Screwing it up takes a great deal of cooperation. Claiming that a single piece of legislation was responsible for (or could have averted) is just political grandstanding. We have no advice to offer on how best to solve the financial crisis. But these sorts of partisan caricatures can only make the task more difficult.

–by Joe Miller and Brooks Jackson

Crisis.?.

Is it just me or ever time we have a Presidential Election the media is a twitter about some sort of crisis in America; In 2006 it was corrupt "republican" congress, by the way whatever happened to the congressional page scandal and Mark Foley? Remember how Pelosi and John Conyers promised a full investigation. Then there was 2004 and the constant drumbeat of bad news from Iraq, In 2000 the economy. And here we are in 2008 and its the economy again.

Everyone of them were damaging to the republicans, and everyone of them hit full media stride immediately before election day. How convenient, and just how big of a crisis is this? If you listen to we Americans, 80% of us are convinced it isn't a big enough crisis in order to spend 700 billion dollars worth of money the government doesn't have.

So is it? There are at least 168 economists who wrote a letter to congress that don't believe it is large enough a crisis in order to warrant a bail out. And one day after posting a -777 point loss the the bargain hunters prowled the market driving the gains to nearly 500 points today. So what the hell is going on?

One thing that I do know is that democrats are wasting no time getting to a microphone and in order to blame the administration, and the media echo chamber is in overdrive.... Its an election year folks.

Straight Talk.....

Last nights debate solidified in my mind something. Their is a massive experience gap between Obama and McCain. I know their are many people that refuse to acknowledge it simply because they blame the state of the economy on this administration. Although thereare things that President Bush could have done, I'm tired of people pretending that the executive branch controls all facets of our government. We have a congress in this nation and they too are complicit, if not the cause of this mess.

Obama made his position clear, "draw nigh unto me and I (with the help of taxpayer dollars, especially those from evil rich people) will make all your troubles fade away. Seriously folks has anything the federal government done or didn't do ever impacted you financially. I hear many pundits ruminate about the 1990's how great the economy was and how the world was a much better place with Bill Clinton in the oval office. I would sure like someone to explain to me if things were so spectacular, why it was for me the worst finacial period of my life. My point is this, the vast majority our money problems are self-inflicted. Bill Clinton didn't cause my money troubles, I did.

To me personally, the economy is not that important. Money comes and money goes, I've had lots of it, lost all of it and repeated the cycle. Trust me money isn't the center of the life, and their isn't anything that these two men can do to fix your money trouble no matter how many shiny new entitlement programs Obama promises or spending cuts McCain promises. If you disagree, you need some help alright, but not economically.

The real debate is which of these two men will make the best Commander in Chief. Which man can best protect this nation from enemies foreign and domestic. Which man will best protect the constitution of this nation. It is a solemn decision, and one that needs to be made devoid of bias. It is the most important choice we make in our lifes, and we should remember it is a priviledge to do it.

Intelligence Optional

Lets Do Some Campaignin'

Send a JibJab Sendables® eCard Today!

Hillary? Tears?

An emotional Hillary? Wow things have gone badly for the heir apparent if old stone face is actually willing to crack that facade with some emotion.... notice I didn't say "genuine emotion". I am convinced that nothing she does is by accident it is all contrived.

Even were it genuine emotion why now? Why not from the beginning show your softer womanly side? Perhaps until this point in her campaign there was no need to show it. But now that she has run headlong into the buzz saw known as Barrack Obama she has a real reason to show a few tears. For the first time since she announced her queen ship, she faces a real threat to her coronation.

If she is going to regain her advantage she needs to slow the Obama assault. How better to show what a special candidate she actually is by highlighting her most marked difference from the rest of the field. I think its clear that in a campaign where "change" is the headline the best tactic for Hillary is to show what better way to affect change than putting a woman in the oval office.

I personally think she has been weakened, not done by a long shot, but definitely weakened. Truthfully she was weak from the beginning its just now that the chickens are coming home to roost. Its very difficult to call a horse race after the first furlong, though she is failing now, mid February maybe a very very different race altogether. Stay tuned the house hasn't fallen on the wicked witch yet.

Runaround Hsu

Socialism 101

Today Obama visited Wall Street and basically cussed them out for being capitalist and Hillary launched her newest vision of Hillarycare. Two fine examples of why we don't need either one of them as President.

The problem is that their comments sound feasible and they play to those that can't differentiate between socialism and capitalism. The liberals have done a bang up job portraying capitalism as a system designed to make the rich richer and keep the poor poor. Quaint notion but it couldn't be farther from the truth. Capitalism is a system designed to give everyone the ability to be financially successful... if they are willing to do the work.

And there lies the problem. Work isn't fun. Sitting back and letting the government hand you entitlements is easy. I am not saying the government shouldn't provide help to those who need it, I am saying they should provide help "only" to those who need it.

This notion that the government should provide as services paid for by taxation is simply socialism. Ask the USSR how well that worked. It doesn't, socialism retards economic growth and Robin Hood entitlement programs do the same thing. Increasing taxes upon the business and the rich hurts our economic growth it doesn't help it.

If you remove tax cut incentives and replace it with huge tax increases on the rich what happens? Do you think that when a board of directors is forced to pay more taxation they will absorb that increase themselves? No they will not, they will still live in their million dollar homes and have their corporate jets. The increase will just be passed on. In the form of price increases and less capital investment in their business. Both of which don't hurt the rich, but the middle and lower class.

Supply side economics 101 you do not make poor people rich by making rich people poor. In fact the notion that overtaxing the rich will help the poor is pure foolishness. In fact when you look at the taxation reforms Democrats propose its nothing more than income redistribution, that is socialism.... period.

Hillary, Hillary, Hillary

Shady campaign finance deals and Clinton go together like bread and butter. How many stories have to surface before allegations stick. From Whitewater to the Lincoln Bedroom, to the Chinese Monks, the list seems endless. But it maybe changing, the NYT ran a front page story about Norman Hsu, amazing, the paper of record reporting on something that reflects negatively on Hillary.

This story may indeed have legs. With Her sizable lead over Obama and Edwards its almost a certainty that they will be doing everything in their power to ensure that it does. I'm sure that Edwards especially is very happy over this alleged scandal given his inclination to "honest" campaign financing. I'm sure the wheels are turning in the Edwards camp trying to come up with an angle to use this story to his benefit.

I also find interesting that this story is breaking just mere days before Fred Thompson's official announcement to run. Is just coincidence that the man who headed up the investigation of Bill Clinton's campaign donations joins the race and a story about possible finance violations breaks in Hillary's camp? Seems kind of suspicious, kind of funny if you ask me. Fred me be Hillary's worst enemy in more ways than one.

Castro Votes

One again a socialist dictator shows their detachment with the American political system. Castro released that he would support Clinton and Obama over all other Presidential candidates. I don't think either one of them should look for campaign donations in south Florida anytime soon.

Neither has officially responded to the endorsement, nor will they. Having a communist dictator on your side isn't exactly a help to your cause. Now some like Gravel might consider it a help but the majority of Americans still care little about having the Cuban dictators support.

Unfortunately this story isn't getting much air time. This disturbs me a bit, is it a signal that the American populace is forgetting the Cold War and the dangers of socialism to our country? We are prone to forget as a nation the valuable lessons we've learned in the past.

This is one lesson we can't afford to forget. Especially with the rise of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and other central American nation leaning left. We need to remember the travesties that socialists governments have done over the years and never accept these leaders as allies. No matter what Sean Penn and Danny Glover say about them.

Fight the Law, The Law Wins

Elvira Arellano was arrested and deported. After her and her lawless friends thumbed their noses at ICE for over a year she was arrested while attempting to attend an immigration rally in LA. Chalk one up for the good guys and Americans that still believe that laws are necessary.

This debate over immigration is a winner for which ever candidate seizes it. Guiliana has made some strong anti-illegal immigration statements, and so has 2nd tier candidates Tancredo and Hunter. On the Democrat side, they have been unsurprisingly mute.

Americans all across the United States are sick of feeling that they are losing their country. That is it in a nutshell. DO we want to stop immigration totally, of course not. We want to stop the illegal invasion of our country.

We are tired of going into Wal-marts in certain cities in this nation and not being able to understand the cashiers when they speak. We are tired of illegal immigrant thugs harming and killing our people. We are tired of prisons being filled to overflowing with these men and women. And we are tired of the Federal government sitting on their hands and pandering to special interest pro-amnesty immigration groups.

I have worked with immigrants from Central America, some I suspect were illegal. For the most part they are good hard working people. I have no quarter them. I do have problems with them being here illegally when their are thousands of people trying to come here legally, going through the government system of jump rope for years, making the investment of time and effort to be a legal citizen. Why should I let illegals have a free pass?

The proponents of amnesty say its impossible to deport them all, It is the kind thing to do, It will cost to much to deport them, and my personal favorite - what have they really done that is "illegal"? They broke our LAW, that is what! Pretty much defined illegal in my opinion.

Again this illness of relativism has infected a good portion of the citizens of this nation. You get by the word illegal by calling them "undocumented", you get bay the law by saying, "we lured them here with jobs". I am willing to concede the latter is true, but only because the 1986 Simpson Bill did not enforce the law which said companies could be held accountable for hiring illegal workers. That is changing.

As for Elvira Arellano. see was deported once and returned, that is felony. She used false documents to obtain a job at Ohare Airport. She ignored immigration enforcement action by hiding in a "sanctuary" in Chicago for over one year. And this the face of your movement? I think your movement needs a face lift.

Joe, Let's Talk Faith

Joe Biden aid in statement one of the reasons the Democrats have been beaten in the last two general elections was because they were afraid to talk about faith. He then went on to offer up Bill Clinton as the model of faith for the party. Bill Clinton? I was inclined to agree with Mr. Biden's assessment until he brought Clinton into it. If Bill Clinton stands as their model of faith, an adulterer and liar, then no wonder they have lost.

Actually Joe better watch throwing words like "faith" around, the liberals with have a fit. His statement might even be construed as an admission to the importance of faith to the majority of the American people. That is an issue that causes agnostic and atheist liberals to foam at the mouth. They have spend decades trying to marginalize God for one of their own to recognize his important has to be maddening to them.

One of the major reason that the Democratic Party has lost much of its support over the years is the stand that they have taken on faith issues. Their stand on issues such as abortion and homosexuality puts them at odds with a majority of believers, Christians in particular. So, is this a signal of a sea change in the party? I doubt it. Its nothing more than attempt to draw support.

Biden's statements should in all serious be heeded solemnly by the Democrats. Faith is an important issue for the majority of voters. But in order to talk about their faith, they must first have faith. That is the issue, talk is cheap.

Most persons that are sincere believers know when someone is truly a person of faith. It shows in their actions, not in their words. This is what politicians, liken Biden, miss, they think they can "talk" faith. I doesn't work that way, you have to live it. And if you live it, you don't have to talk about it... it shows.

Parade of Victims

Last night's Democrat debate featured the standard AFL/CIO fare, a parade of questioners that either lost their husband, lost their homes, or lost their health insurance. All sad stories and my heart really goes out to these people. Not only because of their misfortunes, but because they honestly believe that the crew of Democrats gathered actually had a plan to help them.

There is not very many people I bump into that that haven't had their fair share of tragedy either personally, or in their families. I and my family have had some ourselves. Of the aforementioned and especially myself three things hold true. One, we got through, two, we did so with out the help of any government agency, and third we are stronger and better people for it.

I am a Christian and my trust is in the faith I hold in Jesus. It saddens me when I see people, many who claim to be Christian, look to our government when they need to be looking much higher than that. God is the answer to our problems not Hillary Clinton, although there are times she thinks she is God.

I wasn't always a man of faith, I used to be an Atheist, then an Agnostic, then a Buddhist. Finally, after my life was a total wreck and I was totally broken, I met the Lord. It took me until my thirties to learn that the answers I sought were with me all along. God never left me, though I tried and tried to run from Him. And it happened, a life changing event and I can never go back to the way I was anymore than I can return to my own youth. It is a personal epiphany that defies explanation and only understood by those who have experienced it. I didn't learn the truth, I met the Truth and realized that He is the one I am to rely upon, not myself, not others, and certainly not the government.

This is the crux of the battle between most conservatives and the liberals. They deny the truth and seek to replace it with a facsimile, the all inclusive government. We conservatives of faith, know that government can't replace God, but should facilitate his work here on earth and impede it. We know that governments can't protect us from misfortune, we also know that God allows us to weather these storms not because he hates his children, but because he wants to see us grow

Unfortunately, there are people in this world that allow problems to overcome them, rather than overcoming the problems. And worse there are ruthless people who will exploit those less fortunate for their own political and personal gains by creating a permanent "victim" class in this nation. After all there is no need for big government if there are not plenty of people that depend upon it for help.

Brainless, Godless, and Plain Wrong

I don't know why I continually submit myself to the barrage of vile rhetoric on display at blog site like the DailyKos? I guess I just love to hear the unceasing vitriol of how conservatives are close-minded, war-mongering, insensitive, uncaring, gun loving, Nazis. How we have destroyed this country with our religious beliefs, civil liberties with our War on Terrorism, and the environment with our gas guzzling SUV's. I guess we conservatives are just "Bad" people. Think I go hang me head and cry.

I have always contended that its not a matter of close mindedness that causes my opposition to the liberal views, its the fact that I have made up my mind. A stance alien to the relativistic minds of the left. To them all options must remain open, even ones that have never worked or will ever work. And its that component of the liberal mind that frightens me the most. Their naivety.

Barrack Obama and his insightful comments toward Pakistan for example. I'm sure that he factored in the anti-America factions he has incited against Pervez Musharraf who's government is already in a tenuous position. Is this the type of foreign policy genius that we need running the country? Hollywood liberals seem to to think it is, given their support for Obama.

And speaking of Hollywood liberals, Sean Penn. Penn is visiting Hugo Chavez on a journalistic mission. What exactly does a high school dropout know about journalism? He's a fairly decent actor and should stick to that. These adolescent displays of misuse of his celebrity only confirm his overt hatred of President Bush. A hatred that has become a mental disease in his case. Visiting with a vocal anti-American dictator like Chavez only marginalizes his opinions.

And opinions on Daily Kos are rampant. Anti-Semitic, Anti-military, and Anti-America are common themes. Yet every major Democratic candidate felt compelled to attend this yearly convention. Some of the statements made by them would never be uttered outside this progressive forum, especially Hillary Clinton's. I can't see how you can make statements to one group of your supporters that wouldn't dare speak to others. But that is the liberal mind, everything said is relative. In my opinion that is just plain wrong.

Obama Won't Drop The Bomb-a

This guy just isn't going to quit. His latest is that under "No" circumstances should the United States ever use nuclear weapons. Well there Barrack, there's nothing like having a few thousand one megaton paperweights laying around gathering dust, eh? Hey since we aren't going to use them maybe we can sell them to fund that multi-trillion dollar health care system you're peddling.

I am wondering, if we never should use a nuclear weapon, does that mean the two that we already used were a mistake? Is that the next brilliant statement "Mr. Foreign Policy" will make. This guy really has no clue.

I mean what has this guy really done? He a freshman Senator, before that he served in the Illinois legislature. He really hasn't governed anything and he wants to be the head of the United States government. Why? Because he looks good, has sexy girls making music videos about him, because Hollywood adores him? Not!

Unscientific Political Research

Today I got into a discussion with a gentleman that I work with concerning the Presidential Race. Normally his views are antithetical to mine, However we both agreed that Fred Thompson seemed to be the candidate that best matched each our personal views.

He is a registered democrat who voted for Ronald Reagan twice. Could this be the return of the Reagan supporters to the GOP? I don't know but this I do, I haven't found anyone in the circle of people that I run who supports Obama or Hillary. Probably says more about the circle I run in, than the feel of the electorate, nonetheless I figure I should find at least one.

Not even my feminist, liberal, nut, sister supports Hillary or Obama. Obama I can understand, but Hillary? That is surprising considering my sister's politics. Of course she is far from being a mainstream democrat too. In a recent e-mail she told me she had watched a democrat debate and liked Mike Gravel. That says it all.

Fredhead

Up until recently I have been drawn to Rudy, I like his toughness and I think he would be a good choice to lead this nation. However, The more I read and see Fred Thompson, the more I like the man. Just the fact that the "Times Twins" are trying to smear him is enough to make me like him. Anyone that the LAT and NYT are against I have to be for.

I remember seeing Thompson on the Senate floor years ago delivering a speech on a budget issue. I was impressed with him then and I am even more impressed with him now. He's the type of guy that makes you feel instantly at ease and has a great presence.

I loved the way he recently brushed off the allegations of supporting a pro abortion group. That is the kind of reply to the press that Mr. Reagan would have given. Not that I would advocate Fred being compared to a Ronald Reagan, He's Fred and needs to be Fred.

The only complaint I have is that he has not been as vocal on issue stances as I would have liked to hear. I am supposing that he is waiting until his declaration to run. Which is fine. I'm looking forward to hearing from him what I already believe. That he is a true conservative.

Fred you have the Old Boy's vote.

Shrill-ary Clinton.....

Is it just me or is it Hillary Clinton. I can only take a few sound bites of her high pitch squealing before I have to stop listening. Everyone I talk to seems to have the same visceral reaction when they hear her.

I think it is a direct result of the divorce rate in America, she reminds divorced men of their ex wives.