Future Landscaping: Time to Plant Another Bush?

Future Landscaping: Time to Plant Another Bush?  One of the more popular exercises in presidential politics lately is gauging exactly how serious Jeb Bush is about seeking the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.  He seems to have fired the starting pistol for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.  Now I have no intellectual foundation from which to prognosticate major party nominees.  I don’t read tea leaves too well at all and have no friends in high places that can feed me reliable tidbits of information.  Not being a registered Republican, Jeb would not be my first choice as a nominee.  But I will venture a comment or two regarding Jeb’s prospects…if he decides to pull the trigger.

Even though most consider it a foregone conclusion, I am still not wholly convinced that Hillary Clinton will pursue the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination.  If she does not, it will get just as interesting on the left side of the aisle as it will likely be on the right.  But for the sake of discussion, let us assume that Hillary runs for and claims said Democratic nomination.  We now have a Democratic nominee who wears couch covers as dresses, has a face on two sides of her head to address the moderate and left wings of her party, will be 69 years old (and bless her heart, she looks every day of it) the day she takes office if she is successful, and has more baggage to tote into a campaign than the New York Giants (her adopted Senate state) could manage.  Oh...did I mention that the woman has the personality of a door knob and occasionally goes all "Oliver Stone" with her conspiracy theories?  One last point: I do not believe that running as the first female president will have quite the luster as running as the first black president.  The Democrats have gotten just about all of the mileage out of their “War on Women” that is possible and women simply will not vote as monolithic for one of their own as black Americans have.

I readily concede the folly of trying to predict a Republican nominee from the lengthy list of possible candidates.  But there are some points to be made in favor of Jeb Bush.  Unless the national political climate changes dramatically in the next two years, Obama will not be leaving office as a very popular president, many folks will still harbor some buyer’s remorse, and polls be damned…many moderates of all stripes will still prefer W over O in a comparison contest.  After Obama’s circus vacates WDC, I have to believe that many folks will be looking for and will welcome some degree of competency and accomplishment in their candidate and will take a favorable view of a successful ex-governor.  

 

I will venture to say that with the specter of "W and Bill's" ghosts hovering around each campaign, it will pretty much be a political wash.  Will the right wing of the Republican Party prevent Jeb from acquiring the nomination?  For all of the rap about him not being conservative enough, the fact is that his record shows he is quite conservative in all but two major areas of governing: immigration reform and common core education.  Whether or not you agree with his stance on either subject, they are without a doubt issues that need discussing and merit more than one sensible approach.  In other words, if he can sell his positions on each as “reasonable”, I see no problem with him winning over a significant number of Republican votes in the primary season.  Additionally, a close examination of his record will show that he is very much a fiscal conservative; much more so than his brother.  This will appeal not only to many Republican primary voters but to many Independents and moderate Democrats who prefer a “social moderate/fiscal conservative”.  

 

Say what you will about the Romney and Jeb comparisons, but I do not recall Mitt ever telling the right wing to back up and rethink their positions on major issues; I like the spunk Jeb has shown in doing just that.   Some in the liberal press have already begun to spend ink on publicizing how well Jeb has done in recent years with his “off shore “investments.  Two points here: Does anyone really think that between “Wall Street Connections”, “Pork Belly Futures”, and “Whitewater” that Hillary wants the debate to head down that alley?   After watching the media’s “carnival of the absurd” that accompanied Romney and his wealth, I marvel at the fact that no one mentions that Republican presidents tend to come into office wealthy, while Democratic presidents tend to acquire their wealth while in office and afterwards.  Let me think….wasn’t it Hillary that said they came into the White House broke?

Now Jeb might not be my choice for the Republican nomination and he may not even be in the running when the contest becomes serious, but I will predict this here and now: If the 2016 presidential race is between Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush, not only will Jeb Bush be our next president; but he will also come into office with a Republican Senate and House. 

 

 

 

Is the College Playoff a Good Idea?

Is the College Playoff a Good Idea?  It is soooooo very “Good Idea”.  While not the gold standard set forth by Yahoo sportswriter Dan Wetzel http://sports.yahoo.com/news/wetzels-playoff-plan-money-talks-085100096--ncaaf.html , it is nonetheless a great start and a marvelous replacement for the idiotic BCS formula.  Now there is legitimate debate that will be forthcoming about the composition of the selection committee and that will be tricky indeed.  The people who have the experience and the context to make the best decisions are the very same people that will likely have a vested interest in one of the teams being considered.  As long as they maintain a high degree of integrity and independence, and keep the process transparent, this will eventually take care of itself.  The larger question is, of course….what exactly is the right number of teams to put in the playoff?  That, my friends, is a very interesting question and should bring forth a fascinating discussion by college fans all across the nation.

Without putting forth a specific number, I will put forth a specific rationale for selecting that number.  I will also go on record as saying that “4” is not the right number.  This year, the magic number would have been “6”; the four that have been selected plus TCU and Baylor.  Why?  Because any of those six would have a reasonable chance to win out and capture the championship; the drop-off that occurs after six does not cover that contingency.  The guiding principle in setting the selection number should be this: Any team that would have a reasonable (as defined by the selection committee) chance to win out in a playoff should be in the playoff.  The seed is not nearly as important as simply giving every team that might be the best the chance to prove it.  Now some that have put forth the magic number as “6” have said that the teams should be seeded and numbers 1 and 2 should receive first round byes.  This is worth considering, but I submit that if you are conducting a championship playoff with as few as 6 teams, it is difficult to justify giving two of those teams the huge advantage of a first round bye.  This year, six would be the correct number; but would it be correct every year?  No, it would not.  Some years, the selection principle might limit the teams to 4; other years, it might be more than 6.  The selection number needs to consistent and set in stone.  So, we now consider bumping the number of playoff teams up to eight.  If we move up to eight, we eliminate the prospect of first round byes; I like that.  However, we bring in the distinct possibility that there will some teams, in certain years, selected for the playoffs that really have no business playing for a national championship.  Two points about this…If the selection committee is going to err, I would prefer they err by putting a lesser team in the mix rather than leaving a worthy team out of the mix.  After all, if a team considered “lesser” wins out; they were not “lesser” after all, were they?  Secondly, if the selection committee does a decent job of seeding the playoff teams, the last teams in will have the most difficult first round games and that should deal rather effectively with any question regarding their worthiness.  One thing is fairly certain: Any number larger than eight, without implementing a full-blown Wetzel plan, would be too many.  How many years can you think of where you thought more than the top eight teams in the first post-season rankings had a chance to be the best team in land?  I can’t think of a single one in my lifetime; eight ought to cover it.

So as we celebrate the death of the BCS, let’s enjoy some potentially great matchups in this inaugural college playoff and look forward with interest to the debate that will follow.  The first step to the playoffs was the most difficult; it will only get better from here on in.  Settle…it…on…the…field.

 

Reconciliation A Nonstarter for the Senate; But Leave the Nuclear Option Intact.

Reconciliation A Nonstarter for the Senate; But Leave the Nuclear Option Intact.  A key part of the Obamacare passage without a single
Republican vote was the illegitimate use of the reconciliation process.  There is now serious discussion by some Republicans to use that same process to dismantle it.  At the same time, it appears that the incoming Republican majority will not take the “Harry Reid” nuclear option off the table.  In one of these cases, two wrongs don’t make a right; in one, two will.

I have said many times before that any legislation that cannot acquire at least token opposing party support should not be passed.  Any bill with any merit whatsoever should be able to garner some votes from across the political aisle.  The Democrats passed Obamacare in an abnormal fashion and have been paying the price for that act ever since.   Well over 20 Senate Democrats who voted for it have now been voted out of office or decided not to run for reelection.  Obamacare remains a predominantly unpopular program with the public and continues to damage the Democratic brand.  This is the predictable and proper results when a political party chooses to abuse their majority position in Congress.  This is the first reason that Republicans should not use the reconciliation process to attempt repeal or revision of Obamacare.  When a piece of legislation is as sweeping and impactful as Obamacare, it should not be changed in any fashion other than bipartisan.  Lest the Obamacare curse spread across the aisle and begin to infect Republicans, the Grand Old Party had better get a few Democrats on board before trying to dismantle Obama’s byzantine trophy.

On the other hand, the nuclear option is a separate and distinctly different matter.  In today’s world of activist judges and executive overreach, federal judges and agency officials have huge and immediate impact on the everyday lives of American citizens.  Even when proven to be illegal or improper from the get go, our system takes so very long to deal with these judicial transgressions of power and trust that oftentimes the damage is irreparable by the time the original action is overturned.  In the case of federal judges, there must be something astronomically liberating about a lifetime appointment to the bench.  Some of these black-robed monoliths are on such a power-rush that they appear to see our country and its people as nothing more than a human chess board ala “Alice in Wonderland”.  Their irrational and idealist rulings are no less than breathtaking in their boldness and breadth; and since the implementation of the Senate nuclear rule, the Obama administration has loaded up the judicial system with these mavericks at a level never seen before.  In this instance, the danger is so immediate and omnipresent that remedial action must be taken as soon as possible in any possible way.  The need to restore some type of ideological balance to the federal judiciary is so pressing that it would be foolish for the Republicans to shelve the nuclear option at this point.  That genie will likely never go back into the bottle from whence it came.

 

After Three Quarters...Trailing Hopelessly and Flailing About Shamelessly.

After Three Quarters…Trailing Hopelessly and Flailing About Shamelessly.  It is a mystery of life that oftentimes events coalesce in such a way that brings a new clarity and focus to a truth that has been obscured for some time.  To me, that is where we find ourselves with the combination of the state of international affairs, domestic affairs, political affairs, and cultural affairs and how all of these taken together reflect on our president and Liberal philosophy.  Taken individually:

·      And now our president has turned his deft diplomatic skills (tic) southward to the island of Cuba; changing with a few pointed words what has been USA policy towards that government for over 50 years.  As with so many of his foreign policy actions, he has once again stumbled into the right thing for the wrong reasons.  A strong argument can be made that an easing of the trade and commerce barriers between the US and Cuba holds the potential of impacting their social fabric in a positive way.  But that is not Obama’s primary concern.  Once again, his past rhetoric is contradictory to his actions; he changes his mind depending on wind gusts in Oklahoma (and the wind blows a lot in Oklahoma!).  His effort on Cuba is made largely to put an exclamation point on his executive initiatives and his liberal bent in foreign policy.  And once again, he takes a sweeping foreign policy initiative without any semblance of consultation with Congress or those minds in and around government who might have a valuable opinion on the matter.  Combine this Cuba escapade with Putin/Ukraine, the Middle East, and China/Nork and the spontaneous brew simply gets more bizarre.  What we have is a president who allows passing whims to dictate his impactful actions and decisions.  Pathetic.

·      Race relations are at their lowest point in the last 25-30 years.  Obama and Holder have squandered the opportunity to heal some racial wounds and have instead injected racism into every conceivable aspect of our society; into many places where it do not previously reside.  His treasury policy continues to drift, based on the premise that if the idea appeals to him, then there is no reason not to spend the money to finance it; the end justifies the means.  Legislation be damned; Obama chooses to rule by fiat and God forgive the heathens that oppose such glorious wisdom.  Less than half of our population now supports not only themselves, but the other half as well.  Entitlement is the new battle cry of the left and much of our youth.  Obamacare continues to eat away at our nation’s health care system, while inflicting terrible financial costs on our people and our government.  Young professionals now graduate from college with crippling debt, a head full of liberal nonsense, and the prospect of moving back in with their parents.  Yes…our president has done a remarkable job of pouring gasoline on the fires he found and creating many new ones to go along with them.

·      It is difficult to conceive of a political environment that promises to be as unproductive and chaotic as the one we now have.  And instead of stepping forward to provide leadership that attempts to address that situation, our president is hell-bent on seeing how far he can expand executive authority.  He has always been lazy when it comes to the heavy lifting of making law; but now as he enters his final two years, it appears he is simply going to do all he can to totally wreck the hotel room before moving on to the next gig.

·      The media bias towards the Left has been somewhat subdued since the humbling effects of the recent mid-term elections; but Obama’s Friday press love-fest has got them standing and cheering on the sidelines.  First off, this administration has zero credibility on any manner of data that they release.  They lie.  They cannot be trusted.  So the folly of extending that data to conclusions that put administration efforts in a positive light should be of little surprise to anyone paying attention.  As the polls and our lying eyes continue to tell us all, the public is not buying the “wonderful and booming economy” fairy tale being put forth by this administration.  Entitlements continue to erode the ethics of our population; the debt continues to balloon; in spite of record tax revenue, our federal spending is totally out of control; government is evermore dysfunctional each day and made more so with the rash of executive narcissism that builds the wall between the Executive and the Legislative even higher.  Obama is like a  petulant child who has been rebuked by his parents, goes to his room, looks around to see how many toys he can mangle, and sets forth to do the maximum amount of damage in the least amount of time; all the while screaming “Look at Me!”.  It is fascinating to me that while the press credits Obama policy (extremely convoluted logic) with rendering Putin impotent, the same impotency-rendering of Obama by the mid-terms simply strengthens his hand and “reinvigorates” his leadership.  The fact is that Obama opposed the very market directions that have devalued the ruble; this has all happened in spite of his policies.  Though they are both fraught with peril, I fear the “wounded bear” much more than the “reinvigorated weasel”.

The “fourth quarter” analogy being put forth by this administration is a stark reminder to all of us of exactly how Obama and his ilk view his job; it is a game to them.  They overly-celebrate the wins, exaggerate the victories, shamelessly hype their perceived achievements, and simply ignore their failures and shortcomings; all the time aided and abetted by the mainstream media.  This pathetic child and his loyal friends have turned our White House into a playroom for six years.  He has now publicly declared that he will do his dead level best in the time remaining to lose a few pieces of every puzzle, break an arm or leg off of every action figure, lose a wheel or two off of every vehicle, and mark up the pages in every storybook.  As much as we can celebrate that his time in office is 75 percent over and Congress will provide a bit of firewall between him and his maddening agenda, we should all shudder at the potential damage he can continue to inflict on our nation over the next two years.  We can only hope that the fourth quarter passes quickly, common sense can maintain possession through an effective ground game, and the referees don’t come up with too many bizarre calls to make the score closer.

Call It What It Is.

Call It What It Is.  The entire Ferguson, MO shooting episode has been a bit surreal.  Most of the people who have been covered or quoted by the media have had their own agendas and that is what has driven their comments on the issue.  But after careful consideration of the evidence available, there are some undeniable points that should be stressed.

·      Anytime a life is lost. it is tragic; even more so when the loss is a youth.  There is so much special about every child and the world will never fully realize what is lost with that particular person.  Regardless of the circumstances that took his life, Michael Brown’s death is a tragedy.

·      By all indications, the Grand Jury in Ferguson did their job thoroughly and carefully.  The system worked.  The officer in question was judged by his community peers to be innocent of criminal actions.  The obvious temptation to indict on lesser charge(s) for political reasons was resisted, as was the temptation to bypass the Grand Jury process for a trial. The constitution was followed and justice prevailed.

·      No matter what statistics you wish to quote, Michael Brown’s skin color did not put a target on his back; his act of thievery did.

·      Based on the Grand Jury’s body of evidence, there were three obvious and indisputable opportunities to avoid this episode:

1.   Michel Brown, under the influence of weed, could have chosen not to steal a box of cigars from the convenience store.  When caught red-handed by the store clerk, he could have handed back the cigars and that might very well have eliminated any search for him by the police.

2.   At the time he was stopped by the officer while walking down the middle of the street, Michael Brown could have stepped over to the side of the road, as instructed, peaceably and surrendered to questioning.  Instead, he chose to struggle with the officer.

3.   Following the chase from the shooting that occurred at the police vehicle, Michael Brown once again chose not to surrender peaceably and exhibited aggressive behavior towards the officer, resulting in his fatal shooting.

·      Michael Brown made a terrible mistake by choosing to steal.  He paid for that decision with his life.  Even after committing the initial crime, he was given multiple opportunities to end the matter peaceably.  He chose not to.  As tragic as his death is, the blame for that death must rest with Michael Brown and the actions he took.

 

Let It Lay, Foks; Just Let It Lay.

Let It Lay, Folks; Just Let It Lay.  I have been extremely amused by all of the Republican hand-wringing over Obama’s recent immigration executive action.  Much of it has simply been Obama’s media hacks placing the onus on the Republicans to deflect attention from the real constitutional questions (Now the Republicans have to show they can govern).  However, the Republicans themselves have fed into the frenzy by repeatedly warning against the action before it was taken, by loudly and accurately pointing out the potential costs and pitfalls of such an action, and by making disparate threats in case it did happen.  A few on the far right are screaming “Impeach”; a non-starter for any person with any sense of realism.  A few of the more moderate-inclined are campaigning to use the “Power of the Purse” and to try and squeeze the life out of this new policy by starving it for funds.  This would never work because any president brazen enough to take this action in the first place will have no reluctance to shuffle funds around, legally or illegally, to accomplish what he wants.  It may actually turn out that the “Legal Challenge”, as far-fetched as it seems, will be the downfall of this policy.  The Courts have become so much more politically involved over the last several years.  But this course would be very time-consuming and would likely conclude after Obama has already left office. 

I submit that the best solution is two-fold.  First, knowing that a Republican president elected in 2016 would reverse this action, just leave it alone; let it lay.  Just like Obamacare, it is bad policy and it will create nothing but trouble for as long as it exists.  Any possible benefits will be far outweighed, in a very obvious fashion, by the costs to our nation and our society.  Let the pain soak in.  Let the Democrats embrace this policy; MAKE the Democrats own this policy.  Remind the public at every opportunity who is responsible for this action and the implications that will bleed out over the next few years.  The fact is that Obamacare cost the Democratic party nearly 30 Senate seats.  It is entirely likely that this new immigration action will turn out to just as expensive.  Instead of running around and crying about the sky falling, the Republicans should put McConnell and Boehner in front of the microphones and set out the case that this was the wrong approach, it is an affront to our government, it is bad policy, but…elections have consequences and this what the people did to themselves when they re-elected this man in 2012.  How much damage can this new policy do in two years?  Time will tell.  

Secondly, take selected actions in areas where you have clear control.  Take account of how Obama did this and file it away.  Make it as clear as possible through the appropriations process that this is his baby and he must find the funds to accomplish it.  Fund the involved agencies as if this new policy did not exist and let them scuffle to get it done.  Obama has once again publicly demonstrated that he has no interest whatsoever in bipartisan efforts.  Fine; let him stew in his executive action juices.  Find your Democrat partners where they may exist in the House and the Senate.  Work with them at every opportunity to get some business done.  And, at every opportunity, remind this president that even though there are some things he can accomplish without the consent of Congress through executive action, there are also many areas where Congress can be a “pain in the ass” when he tries to do his job.  Let the people judge how wise Obama’s policy is.  Let them see if the Democrats in Congress continue to enable him in his efforts.  Let the public weigh the real value of a Republican president to go with a Republican Congress in 2016.  Let it lay; just let it lay. 

Lift The Curse....Please!!

Lift The Curse…..Please!!  There is a darkness that lies over our nation.  It seeps into all that our government endeavors to accomplish.  It divides our people and our leaders.  It is the elephant in the room whose presence dominates even when silent.  It is the dog that does not bark; casting its fierce demeanor through its mere presence.  It is the impediment to any fundamental progress in normal governing.  It is the wound that will not heal; it is the scab that is repeatedly ripped open.  It is the transgression that cannot be forgiven.  It is in everyone’s face every day and its omnipresence is undeniable.  Every day, every week, every month that goes by; its poisonous influence becomes ever more invasive and no one seems capable of looking beyond it to a new day, free of its confusion and arbitrary nature.  Can we not lift this curse of Obamacare?

Republicans are hell-bent on repeal.  Democrats are hell-bent on preservation.  Both are blinded by partisanship to the broad areas of agreement between them and the perceived political implications of reasonable compromise.  At the end of the day, is it truly as simple as Democrats admitting that it was an illegitimate child of the legislative process whose intent was noble but whose process was maddening.  The Republicans, on the other hand, must accept the pound of flesh that they have already realized from the ACA as sufficient and realize that a major overhaul that leaves fundamental principles of agreement constitutes an adequate repudiation of the original piece of legislation.  Both sides of the aisle must understand that it is not sustainable in its current form; that the individual and employer mandates are an improper intrusion into the free market; that health care must be dealt with in a serious and immediate fashion because people actually NEED it and USE it; and that it constitutes a logjam that is preventing any other effort at bipartisanship from having any prospect of success. 

Call it repeal/replace; call it revision; call it overhaul.  Just get it done!  The 2017 Project and Ed Gillespie have laid out detailed blueprints of the path to solving this dilemma.  I have long ago given up on Obama as being an honest partner in any form of legislative compromise.  But I cling to the hope that there are Democrats in the House and the Senate that will join with Republicans in an effort to put forth a veto-proof solution to the curse of Obamacare.

What To Do With A Republican Congress?

What To Do With A Republican Congress? Now that the midterms are history and the Republicans control the House and the Senate, what can we expect to see from the two legislative branches of our government over the next two years?  There will be analysis, advice, and speculation galore about how the Administration should handle things to improve the 2016 Democrat presidential nominee’s chance at winning.  That same body of “wisdom” will be whispering in McConnell’s and Boehner’s ears about setting the stage for a Republican presidential victory in 2016.  But just for the hell of it, let us speculate for a moment about how things could develop in such a way that constructive, sensible, and bipartisan legislation could be produced.  And remain calm, my friends…this trip to Disneyland is free of charge.

In their wildest dreams, Republicans will not gain enough seats in the new Senate to over-ride a Presidential veto.  Therefore, as the debate goes, one of two choices will be to pass legislation that is mainly Republican-authored and dare the president to veto it.   If this course is taken, the appearance at first will not really be too different from what we have been seeing over the last two years; it will just be in form of process as opposed to rhetoric.  I suppose that if the sheer volume of vetoes approaches a high number, the public will blame the president for intransigence; but given the current unpopularity of Congress, it is not unreasonable that the public would continue to largely hold the Republicans responsible for a failure to enact meaningful legislation.  There will be some powerful and intelligent people that argue that this course will provide the best opportunity for the Republicans to retake the White House in 2016 and thus be in a position to unwind the nanny state morass of this Administration.  They may be right; but it is a terrible gamble that will not only continue the insane gridlock that currently exists but will also perpetuate the low opinion that most folks have of our government and its relative competence.

An alternative to this approach would be to attempt a high-wire act.  It is all about the math.  If a piece of legislation can pass both houses with a sufficient vote total to over-ride a veto, then the Executive decision on approval becomes infinitely more difficult.  Suddenly, Obama’s disagreement is no longer with the Republicans in Congress; his disagreement is with those Democrats who voted for the legislation.  I submit that this would bring into stark realization the fact that Obama’s liberal agenda is out of step not only with most of the nation, but also with most of Congress.  It will pit a reasonable and bipartisan approach to legislation against an ideologue with a radical, personal agenda.  That, my friends, is a fight that Republicans can win and that this nation can appreciate.  So what if some of the good press rubs off on the Democrats?  How-D-Freaking-Do!!  When things go well, there is plenty of credit to go around and there can be plenty of winners on both sides of the political aisle.  The biggest winner of all would be the citizens of these United States.

Whether it is Harry Reid or Mitch McConnell, it must be incredibly difficult to seek any form of consensus in the U.S. Senate.  All the prima donnas, all the agendas, all the pathetic media coverage, and all of the overstated power and authority accredited to it leave the Senate as an impossible place to do business.  But it is my belief that even though McConnell can be as rabidly partisan as any Senator on the hill, he has been around long enough to understand what the Senate once was and yearns for it to return to some form of relevance and efficiency, restoring some semblance of integrity and trust.  If a sufficient degree of civility can be re-established in the Senate to the point where honest and sincere debate can once again commence, I cling to the hope that McConnell can find Democratic leaders and Democratic votes for good, constructive legislation that will begin to address the serious issues facing this country.  There is a strong argument to be made that under reasonable conditions of debate and process, if a piece of legislation cannot obtain a sufficient number of Democratic votes to over-ride a veto, then it was simply a partisan bill to start with. 

Over the last term and a half, Obama has demonstrated the trust and credibility of a thief and the co-operative nature of a 2 year old child; it is perfectly understandable that McConnell and Boehner do not trust him to be an honest partner in the legislative process.  But now that the sheet has been pulled back on the One and he has been exposed to all as the charlatan that he is, there must be some Democrats in the Senate and the House that will be willing to work with Republicans in an effort to revise our tax laws so that they encourage economic activity instead of creating a permanent class system; to deal with the realities of an open southern border and millions of illegal aliens already residing in our nation; to take an honest and pragmatic approach to government spending that provides what is necessary and no more; to make some common sense revisions to Social Security and entitlements that makes them sustainable; and to either repeal-and-replace the Obamacare debacle or dramatically revise it to reflect an overall recognition that health care for all is essential but it must be made available in an affordable way through the private sector.

If this latter scenario could play out in WDC, then the chances of having a substantive and sincere debate over real issues and real solutions in the next presidential election cycle will be greatly enhanced.  It doesn’t mean that we are guaranteed to get that marvelous and inspirational President that we all yearn for, but it does mean that the center of gravity for this great democracy of ours will return to its rightful location…the halls of Congress.

 

Rethinking Romney.

Rethinking Romney.  Several posts back, I ventured my early endorsement for a 2016 Republican ticket.  I thought then, and I think now, that the name of the game is “WIN”.  If you do not win, you cannot make policy.  Based on that imperative, I believe that the best Republican chance for winning the 2016 presidential contest is the team of Rubio and Ayotte.  Personally, I would prefer a more seasoned candidate, but Rubio has a compelling life story, has been very involved in national leadership for several years now, and has not been reluctant to put forth thoughtful and detailed policy statements that make a lot of sense.  Ayotte is a bright, intelligent former prosecutor with a good record of accomplishment.

Having said all of that, I am intrigued by the continuing speculation of Romney running again.  I am old school enough to lean towards the position of once you’ve had your chance and fail; you step aside and let someone else take a shot.  However, many of my old school philosophies have been found wanting over the last few years and perhaps this is the time to mothball another one.  The last time he ran, I thought Romney was exactly the right man for the right job at the right time.  Like many others, I find it punishing to think of what might be like today if he had won.  If, in fact, one believed he was right for the job last time around, you could argue that he is even more right for the job this time around.  But as much as I admire Romney and his resume, I have two serious reservations about running him again.

Obama won the first time around on hope and change; pure emotion and theatrics.  I am still not sure how he won the second time around, but it must be attributed in large part to low-information voters who consider neither performance nor reality when pulling the lever.  As serious as this nation’s problems are and as pathetic as the current administration is, I still fear that a sufficient number of low-information voters could be energized once again to support a Democrat.  The plain and simple fact is that when they are given a fairly level playing field, the Democratic Party knows how to win elections.  There is no proof that the Republican Party has yet figured out the value of unity and turnout technology.   The youthful image and the obvious energy that a Rubio/Ayotte ticket would bring with it would no doubt blunt much of the image politics that we see today.  They are far better equipped for this type of contest than Romney.

Secondly, the stakes for the Republican Party winning the 2016 Presidential Election could not be higher.  Although the election is still in its early stages, a review of the potential Democrat nominees would indicate that the one that carries the Democrat banner into 2016 will be liberal….very liberal.  If this country goes into another 4-to-8 years with a liberal Democrat in the White House, after the carnage we have seen and realized under Obama, I fear there may be no going back to the land that many of us love and cherish.  It will be a memory.  Because of these high stakes, this might not be the best time to shelf the conventional wisdom of lose once and you are out.  If Republicans took a chance with Romney again and lost, the second guessing would be endless and the nagging thought would persist about how great an idea it was to run him a second time.  This possibility argues strongly for going with a new candidate; a candidate that exudes energy and charisma; a candidate with conservative fiscal policy and moderate social policy; a candidate that will have the courage to risk political capital on bipartisanship and tackle the big problems that our nation faces.  Romney may still be the best man for the job; but I continue to believe that Rubio and Ayotte give Republicans the best chance to win.

 

A Little Something To Keep You Awake At Night.

A Little Something To Keep You Awake At Night.  I worked as a manager in a government agency for over 30 years.  I don’t lay claim to being the sharpest knife in the drawer; maybe not even one of the sharpest.  But simply by surviving that period of time in civil service, one cannot help but divine some hard lessons about how our government functions.  One of those hard lessons is having to constantly deal with the patronage system; otherwise known as political appointees who serve at the pleasure of the party in power.  In most cases, even though you as an employee might not agree with the policy you are helping to implement, you can appreciate the fact that what you are doing is the result of the electoral system that we have in place and the people who are calling the shots are fairly competent…albeit in your mind, misguided.  With the occasional bonehead appointee from both parties, my experience was that most all political players of power were competent.  If they fell short in the arena of wit and intelligence, they generally had enough savvy to delegate necessary work to capable career employees and the bills got paid.  This administration…this president…has set a new and pitiful standard in this area.  The most tragic example of this abysmal development is that he has accomplished this with not only the support of the Democratic Party, but also with their complicit participation in the process.  

If Obama had served only one term, this government might well have weathered without lasting damage the abomination of his mismanagement.  However, as we approach the midway point of his second term, it is becoming abundantly clear that it will take several new administrations, perhaps even a generation or two, to climb out of the deep, dark hole he has put this nation into. 

One need only look at the record to validate what I say.  Obama and his ilk claim that the world is a complex place and the challenges are greater than one man and one administration should be expected to manage or solve.  Excuse me…This retort from the man who would heal the planet and stop the rise of the oceans?  One need only watch a few moments of Harf or Psaki to realize that the people who are in charge of making the policies that regulate our daily lives are complete idiots.  These are people who are too inexperienced to perform their appointed duties; too arrogant to realize that do not have all of the answers; and are guided completely by naïve idealism where the “ends justifies the means”…with no regard for the ethical or legal standards that apply to those means.  The many scandals that have plagued this administration…Fast and Furious, IRS, VA hospitals, Obama’s foreign policy wonderland, the FBI, Obamacare…all of these began at least in part because the people in charge held neither the qualifications or dedication necessary to do the job correctly.  And now that the Ebola virus has cropped up in our country, who amongst us does not harbor some fear that Obama has put some similar incompetent in charge of the CDC and we wonder how well this crisis will be handled?

Only now, when Obama’s failure has become so apparent and undeniable, are Democrats beginning to acknowledge the misrepresented bill of goods he sold to us all.  If the mid-terms go Republican as large as they might, look for many more Democrats to begin to distance themselves from this egomaniac and struggle mightily to rewrite the history of their first six year’s allegiance to this administration.  There is certainly a healthy balance to be struck between realistic Liberals and Conservatives; a pragmatic process that somehow reveals the wisdoms of each and the accompanying warts.  But this outfit we now have in the White House…this bunch of idealists whose intelligence is never inwardly challenged…who are so damn certain that they know what is best for me, you, and the rest of the world…this outfit has stained Liberalism so badly that it will take a long, long time for any decent thinking person to respect their positions again.  Nanny state be damned; these people live in a fantasy land that rewards excessive pride and hubris with blind loyalty and the responsible Democrats of this United States ( and there are a bunch of them) will live to rue their silence and complicity in Obama’s follies. 

 

Doing The Right Thing For All The Wrong Reasons.

Doing The Right Thing For The Wrong Reasons.  I detest this president so much that it pains me to point out the rare times when I agree with his policies, but his recent decisions on the Mideast represent such a time.  Regarding the subject of the Islamic State of (fill in the blank ISIS, ISIL, IS??), I must agree with Obama’s ultimate decision but am severely aggravated by his rhetoric and justification for putting forth that policy.

As the president says, I agree that it has become abundantly clear, through many presidents and many years of painful and costly investments of blood and treasure, that things will not change for the better in the Middle East until the countries of the Middle East rise up and deal with their radical elements.  In his own socialist and weasel fashion, Obama has said this repeatedly.  For the first time in his terms, I would love for him to simply stand up on principle and hold his ground.  Instead, he starts out strong, indulging in his nonchalant golfing and vacationing to emphasize that the problem is really “middle eastern” in nature and not inherently American.  But true to form, once the polls turn against him and he begins to encounter political headwinds, he tries to don the demeanor of the warrior and talk tough.  Three words of advice for you Barrack…it ain’t working.  The time is long past when you are going to persuade any person of serious thought that you are a principled and strong leader; that ship has sailed. 

For once in your life; for the first time in your presidency, stand up and defend your core beliefs.  This time, miraculously, you have stumbled upon the correct policy.  NOW is the time to defend your beliefs and show some backbone.  The ages-old conflicts and disputes that are in the Middle East DNA will not be settled by America…or Britain…or Australia…or any other democratic nation on this planet.  The strain of radical Islam that has infected this world and threatens civilized nations everywhere can only be effectively destroyed by the majority of Islam believers that hue to a kinder nature; a nature that respects life, freedom, and choice of religion.  Until that time comes, America will not solve the Middle East problem; no matter how much treasure or blood is spent.

Based on his socialist leanings and his rejection of American exceptionialism, Obama has concluded that America cannot solve the Middle East conundrum.  It is also easy for him to believe this because he has no appetite for a fight and no respect for our history.  He is right…for all the wrong reasons.  But in his typical weasel fashion, even when he makes the right decision, he tries to ease into it in the most painless fashion possible, refusing to acknowledge what he believes and why he believes it.   This particular, and common, behavior of our president is what makes him so weak and lacking of respect.  He is always looking for the easy way out, the path of least resistance.  He is always looking for someone else to blame, never to be held accountable himself.  He is fearful of being out front because things will not always go well for the one who leads.  Thus we are saddled with the “leading from behind” philosophy and a president who has no respect at home and ridiculed from afar. 

For the first time in his political career, it would be so refreshing…no, it would be so inspiring…for our president to stand up, say what he means in unequivocal words, defend his position, and throw caution to the wind.  Of course, it would also be nice if Christmas came on December 25 and June 25.

 

Moral Equivalent? I Got Your Moral Equivalent.

Moral Equivalent?  I Got Your Moral Equivalent.  On December 7, 1941, the Japanese attacked the United States on its own soil by bombing Pearl Harbor.  Over 2,400 Americans were killed that day and the USA was pulled into War World II.  With the war winding down to a finale of an Allied invasion of the Japanese homeland and all of the bloodshed such would entail, a difficult decision was made.  An atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945.  It is estimated that this bomb killed around 150,000 people.  When Japan refused to surrender, another atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, killing around 70,000 people.  On August 15, 1945, Japan surrendered to the Allies.

On July 9, 2014, Israel began an offensive into the Gaza Strip in response to more than 150 rockets that had been fired from there into major Israeli cities. 

In both cases, one side of a dispute played the role of provocateur by launching surprise attacks.  In both cases, the victimized party responded by dealing directly with the attackers in a forceful and effective fashion.  In both cases, that response was undertaken with reluctance because all other avenues of ending the conflict had failed. 

The bombs that fell on Pearl Harbor were blind; they killed with no distinction. The bombs that America dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were indiscriminate.  The radioactive poisoning made no distinction between babies and soldiers; between civilian adults and political leaders.  The incredible destructive forces of the unleashed explosions made no distinctions between schools, hospitals, homes, and military installations. 

The rockets that Hamas chooses to hurl into Israel also know no discrimination.  They kill children and adults equally.  They destroy without discernment.  The missiles that Israel fires in response towards the Gaza Strip, although being as targeted as possible towards military targets, also kill innocents. 

What are the similarities and what are the differences in this analogy?  Both cases are a matter of surprise military attacks.  Both cases involve a warranted and powerful response by those attacked towards their attackers.  Both responses were an effort to end the conflict, disarm the original attackers, and bring a cessation to the bloodshed.  Japan surrendered and the war ended.  Hamas continues to fire rockets, plant bombs, and kidnap Israelis.  Oh, and by the way, Hamas also continues to call for the death of all Jews and the dismantling of Israel. 

Does any American have the moral foundation to criticize Israel for their actions in this conflict?  If our nation, once again, found itself in Israel’s situation, would we be complaining that our counter attacks were killing civilians?  Would we allow our children, our families, our friends, our homes, our neighborhoods, our businesses to be indiscriminately blown up without responding in a meaningful and absolute fashion?  I think not.

Not only should our president stand before the world and declare our unconditional support for the nation of Israel in its quest for survival; not only should our president be clear that we stand side-by-side with our only DEMOCRATIC ally in the middle east today; not only should our president be completely unambiguous about how this nation supports Israel because we hold the same values and ideals…he should do this not in Washington DC, but in Jerusalem.

Make No Mistake About It; This Ain't Natural.

Make No Mistake About It; This Ain’t Natural.  There is some sentiment out there, especially in the liberal community where they are feeling particularly vulnerable these days, that the global chaos we are witnessing today and the domestic morass that we are devolving into are simply natural progressions of disparate and random forces; it was going to happen regardless of whom was in control.  Now in some cases, this thought is being insinuated with added emphasis; in others, it is being spoken out loud.   However, you can count on one thing; as the mid-term elections approach and we then turn out attention to the 2016 election cycle, it is a theme we will be hearing more and more.  And the plain and simple fact is this: It is bullshit.

After ridding Iraq of their despot and bringing to a halt the genocide of its citizens, America found that country of the verge of collapse.  It was suddenly realized that winning the war was simply the first step (the Mission was not accomplished); somebody had to reorganize and rebuild.  As imperfect presidents (i.e. Clinton) learned to do, W. Bush regrouped, initiated the surge, re-established relative order in the country, and made provisions for an environment that would allow Iraq to find its own way.  Contrast that with Libya, where we lied to our allies, proceeded headlong into the fire without notifying them, took out the ruling order, and skipped merrily back home.  Oh…wait a moment…we did leave some personnel in a diplomatic outpost in Benghazi to serve as figureheads for our “grand experiment in leading from behind”.  The results of that travesty will stain this nation for generations to come.

Israel faces increased and wider threats on a daily basis.  Feeding this slide into peril is the fact that Obama and his ilk have been openly hostile to the only democracy in the Middle East, overly generous in their outreach to radical Muslims in the Middle East, and overwhelmed by the predictable course of events in Gaza.

The   flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border was a totally predictable (if not orchestrated?) event that can best be described in executive terms as “being easier to ask for forgiveness than permission”.  Obama is once again employing his Obamacare strategy: Once it is done, who can undo it?

The fact that less than half our this nation’s workforce now has full-time jobs; the fact that our national debt continues to rise unabated; the fact that our burgeoning support programs have lost all sense of purpose and are simply hemorrhaging money; the fact that  Obama’s QE fed policy is simply making the rich richer and squeezing the middle class, while steadily increasing the pressure on the inflation and interest rate balloons;  the fact that household income has actually regressed over his terms; the fact that the partisan and dysfunctional divide between our branches of government is at an historical high; the fact that Putin laughs openly at our president while other world leaders simply wonder what the hell he is doing; the fact that the integrity and prestige of the Executive Branch is dramatically tarnished by his constant whoring for campaign funds and his political appointees’ lack of ethics;  the fact that, presented with a wonderful opportunity to advance the state of race relations in this nation for the better, he has instead further polarized and deepened our racial issues…all of this, while not specifically predicable, was entirely to be expected.  There is a cause and effect principle that exists in this universe and denial of it doesn't make it go away.

No doubt, had Romney been elected in 2012 (as many apparently now long for), everything would not be peaches and cream.  There is evil in the world and that evil will have its mischief.  There are thorny social domestic issues that will continue to vex our nation.  This nation has a fundamental debt problem that will not be solved by one president nor overnight.  But I will venture to guess that had Romney won the last presidential election and been allowed to implement his carefully prepared plans of action, this country would not find itself in the precarious position it is in today.  Whatever else Romney might or might not be, he was at a minimum an experienced and competent manager.  He had a proven track record of accomplishment and understood that there are three kinds of managers in this world: (1) The ones that watch things happen; (2) The ones that make things happen; and (3) The ones that wonder what the hell is happening.  This country can live with a number 1 president; oftentimes the least government is the best government.  This country desperately needed, and needs today, a number 2 president that is a true leader and is motivated by something other than partisan concerns.  This country is saddled with a number 3 president and where we are today was totally predictable.  If you get in the car with a drunk driver, don’t be surprised if you end up in a ditch.  If you get on a plane with a train conductor in the cockpit, don’t be surprised if you crash.  If you elect a person to Congress who has clearly demonstrated an inability to manage their own personal affairs, don’t expect them to author great legislation.  And if you elect, and re-elect, an inexperienced, shallow, incompetent, narcissistic, unprincipled, lazy president; you can expect the debacle we are witnessing today.

Two Comments On Current Events.

Two Comments On Current Events.  I want to pluck two items out of the current tsunami of global and domestic issues swirling around the Obama administration.  Normally, I would not go near them for fear of my obvious ignorance on the subjects being glaringly obvious.  But these two issues are of such import and relevance that I believe I can make a few general observations from an “everyman’s perspective” and not be too far out of line.  Anyway…here goes.

I just read results from a CNN poll that says 33 percent favor impeaching Obama.  Frankly, I find this shocking.  I followed in detail the Clinton impeachment.  I recall Nixon’s resignation to avoid impeachment.  As much as I detest our current president, I subscribe to the theory that not only must the transgression(s) for impeachment be very high and serious, but that there must also be a clear majority of voters who favor such action; there must be a national political will to do it.  I do not believe there is yet sufficient proof of any Obama administration transgression that rises to the level of impeachment nor is there a clear majority of voters that would support impeachment.  For all the heat that Romney took on his “47 percent" remark, he was nonetheless very close to an obvious truth: This nation is so politically polarized that there is a significant and hardcore group of voters who will support Obama regardless of his performance and/or his actions.  If you cannot convince a significant number of these folks to consider impeachment, you don’t even need to bring the subject up.  But I will say this: As distasteful as I find impeachment, even for this president, if it is proven that he or his approval enabled and/or directed the IRS to target taxpayers based on their political beliefs, then his sorry ass should be impeached.  Of all the scandals that surround this pathetic bunch in the White House, this one stands out to me.  As many accomplished journalists have pointed out, Nixon’s articles of impeachment included one that pointed out his failed effort to use the IRS for political purposes.  If it is determined, conclusively, that Obama was personally involved in any of the pertinent actions that led to the admitted IRS targeting of taxpayers, then he should be impeached; political considerations be damned.   Elections have consequences and we, as a nation, are properly suffering through the consequences of reelecting Obama.  But if he is a crook, he should be removed.

The second issue that I will venture an opinion on is the recent court ruling that was adverse to Obamacare; the Halbig decision.  First off, it is incredible to me that intelligent people in the media are making the argument that it is the proper role of the courts to divine the intent of Congress based on accomplished legislation.  I raised two children and have been married to the same woman for over 40 years and I still cannot divine their intent on a regular basis.  Does anyone really think that federal judges (oftentimes political water carriers with agendas) can honestly and objectively determine the intent of an institution as dysfunctional and disparate as Congress?  Now if the language is ambiguous or arbitrary, or even conflicting from section to another, and there is a pressing need to clear up the matter, then I can see where it can rightly fall to the courts to decide the matter.  But when the language is plain as it is in this case; when the legislation was passed in such an extraordinary fashion to begin with; when it is abundantly clear to any reasonable human being that this is no typo or drafting error; there is only one acceptable remedy to this dispute: Congress must readdress their mistake by subsequent action.  As we all know, that is not possible in this case because there is not majority support in Congress, maybe not even in the Senate, for even the original legislation; much less to revise the original legislation.  Any person who supports Obamacare knows that if it was ever reintroduced in the Senate, there is the possibility that it will be dismantled entirely (why all the executive actions on Obamacare?).  And because of this very real fear, Obamacare supporters have come up with  increasingly bizarre theories about why accomplished law should not mean what it literally says.  If our courts (or for that matter, our Executive Branch) can interpret accomplished law to mean whatever they think, what is the point of having a Legislative Branch in the first place?  Obamacare was an illegitimate product of our legislative process; it was a political creature borne out of a political firestorm.  It is only right and proper that if it is to be changed, it should have to go through the legislative process to effect that change.  If it cannot stand or survive that process, so be it.  Just because you get by with something questionable once does not mean that you should expect a second or third pass on the same shenanigan down the road.   

A Good Starting Point: STICK WITH WHAT WORKS!

A Good Starting Point: STICK WITH WHAT WORKS!  Even though we have a wonderful model of government here in America, one of its inherent weaknesses is its political turnover due to election cycles.  Every two or four years, we get a new bunch of geniuses up on Capitol Hill and/or in the White House that believe (A) everything that has occurred prior to their arrival is irrelevant and (B) they have the solution to every damn problem that currently exists in this nation.   Every new President wants to create the United States in their image and look fondly on Mt. Rushmore for a vacancy and a chisel.   In Congress, we rotate committee and sub-committee chairpersons in a ridiculous game of musical chairs to assuage egos and punish losers.  Time after time, we see new legislation being largely authored by committee members who come armed only with ideology and very little experience.  Presidential and patronage appointees at all levels of government begin their quests of management knowing that they have a limited time to work their magic and they certainly don’t intend to waste their time looking backward. 

As a retired civil servant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, I saw firsthand how Congress simply loves to reinvent the wheel.  The use of acronyms in government agencies reaches comedic levels on occasion and one of the most hilarious actors in the cast was the USDA.  There were times when over the span of an 8-to-10 year period, we would see a program introduced, implemented, dismantled, and then reintroduced with very little substantive change…but…with a new name, new forms, and a familiar new promise of being the salvation of all that troubles those who till the soil..  Anyone who has lived through a few administrations and paid any attention whatsoever clearly understands that this same mentality rules the chief executive of our country, whoever that might be.   If you doubt how wasteful, expansive, duplicative, and downright chaotic this type of management is, simply consider the fact that America recently received a record level of tax revenue while at the same time continuing to balloon the federal deficit to near record levels.  The quest for the ultimate nanny state will undoubtedly bankrupt our nation if it is not rolled back and the day of reckoning is not far off.

Whatever the stripes, gender, political leanings, or dreams of our next presidential team turns out to be, I would hope that they would bring with them a simple philosophy: First; let’s find out what is working.  If each department, each agency, each field office could somehow begin with a simple, thorough, and objective review of the programs that are in place…BEFORE THEY CONTINUE PILING ON NEW ONES…we would all be amazed to discover that our government is doing some wonderful things and doing them in a fairly efficient and effective fashion.  Once we determine what is the wheat and what is the chaff, we can begin to eliminate that which is not working.  We can begin the process of having a serious discussion of what the proper role of government is in today’s world and start to prioritize the precious resource of tax revenue that our citizens yield through their blood, sweat, and tears. 

And just a point for all our royal newcomers to Congress and Pennsylvania Avenue: YOU are not the first, you will not be last, and there is very little new under the sun that hasn’t been tried before.  Respect your predecessors; respect the mistakes they made and try not to repeat them; give them credit for the good things they did and keep those wheels turning; pay attention to your hat size and if you see it increasing at an astronomical rate, consume some humble pie; and most important of all…never forget that you work for the people and serve at their pleasure…not the other way around.