What is Going On in Washington?

I guess I should not be surprised by anything that happens in Washington these days but nevertheless, I am stunned at the attitude regarding the Bush Era tax rates. These rates expire at the end of the year and unless something is done, all Americans will face an increase. The Republicans have a united position of making the current rates permanent. The Democrats are all over the place. Some are holding to the $250,000 cut off and some want to raise it to $1 million. There are even some who don't want to raise any taxes, at least not now. Who can keep up with all their "ideas"? They all have known this was coming and yet they sit on their hands. If this is passed to the new Congress in January, there could be a huge mess, even if they retroactively make them permanent. According to Karl Rove, it could cause problems with tax returns and be a disaster. I am no economist so I can't say with any credibility that we should not raise taxes on the so called rich. But it doesn't seem to make sense to raise taxes on those who create jobs and hire people, drive innovation and have investment capital. Who has ever been hired by a poor person? The left doesn't seem to think that these people will generate jobs if they keep their money, they will just hoard it. They blame the tax rates for the current state of the economy, conveniently ignoring the housing market fiasco. Presidents Reagan, Kennedy, and way back when, Calvin Coolidge, all cut taxes and had economic growth. While private sector jobs are being shed at an alarming rate, government jobs are exploding and government employees are now making more than their private sector counterparts. Our 401Ks are shrinking and their pensions are bloated. Why should they be immune to what the rest of us are feeling. My company laid off 1400 people and restructured our time off policy, giving us fewer days. We still get a generous amount but I am sure that was more palatable than even more layoffs. Obama has said he will freeze government employee salaries but how about cutting the workforce and looking at the retirement system they have? Hard choices have to be made by everyone and that means looking at entitlements, earmarks and taxes. We actually do not have a taxing problem, we have a spending problem.

Pelosi for Life?

Yesterday Heath Schuler from North Carolina announced he will challenge Nancy Pelosi for House Minority Leader in the new 112th Congress. Conventional wisdom,of course, says she will win. She would not be running if she didn't have the votes. That's how it works. I know the Republicans are salivating at the thought of her continuing to be the face of the Democratic Party. As one GOP insider put it; she is great at creating jobs, for House Republicans. I don't know how good it will be for our country. She is not only a rigid ideologue but she has no track record of be willing to compromise on anything. She rammed through healthcare, twisted arms to get the votes for Cap and Trade in the House which died a quick death in the Senate. After a crushing loss of 60+ seats, I cannot see how the Democrats think she should still lead the party. But so many of those Blue Dogs are gone. They lost to Republicans because many of them were in more conservative districts. What is left of the Democrats is a much more liberal minority. We are still stuck with Barney Frank and his ilk, who will no doubt vote for her. I am glad to see Schuler challenge her, if for no other reason than to say not everyone is afraid of her. He also promised his constituents that if he was re-elected that he would challenge her. He is more conservative, one of the few Blue Dogs that remain, and seems to be principled. However, it seems nothing is going to stop Pelosi. This reminds of an episode of Designing Women, in which Julia Sugarbaker ran for office and during a debate with her opponent got so exasperated that she uttered these words of wisdom, "I am a Christian and I get down on my knees and pray everyday. One of the things I pray for is that people with good sense will get power and people with power will get good sense and that the rest of us will be blessed with patience and the strength to survive people like you in the meantime!". It seems almost ironic that such an appropriate statement for where we are now would come from a sitcom character from nearly twenty years ago, especially a liberal one.

Looking for Ronald Reagan

As this "silly season" comes to an end and we cast our votes tomorrow, I have been struck by the mood of the country. I titled this piece as I did because throughout this midterm election Ronald Reagan has been referenced more than once. Is that who we are looking for? This generation's Reagan. He was President during my grade school years through my sophomore year in high school, so my firsthand knowledge of his administration is almost non existent. I do know, from the many video clips and documentaries I have seen that Ronald Reagan loved his country. His campaign ad "It's Morning in America" and "The Shining City on the Hill" weren't just slogans. He meant it. He saw America as a beacon to the world. He cherished individual freedom. I know many of the candidates seem to embody those sentiments but can any of them save us from our "Jimmy Carter"? I don't know. The mainstream media deride people like Marco Rubio, Sharron Angle and Sarah Palin, much as they did Reagan. They made fun of him for being an actor, someone to not be taken seriously. They mocked his intelligence. How many in the media have called Sarah Palin dumb? I want to believe that if the Republicans win tomorrow as it looks like they will, that out of this crop of "outsiders" will rise someone with Reagan's vision of this great country. After seeing our current president apologize to other countries for us, belittle the american people by insinuating that the only reason we would vote for republicans is because we are scared and not thinking clearly and not because his policies have failed and failed miserably. I would like to see someone in charge who inspires us again, and has the political will to do what it takes to solve our problems while still believing in our greatness. Is it Palin? Maybe. Could it be Paul Ryan and his roadmap for America? which no one else in the House will embrace but is the only substantive outline of ideas put forward. Could it be Michelle Bachman who seems to have the strength to stand up to the establishment of either party? Marco Rubio is quite impressive, but will he change Washington or will Washington change him? Maybe it will be New Jersey Governor Chris Christie. He has shown he is not afraid of a fight. I love my country and it pains me to see the road we are travelling now. If there is a Reagan out there, we need to hear you.

The Greatest Stimulus is Unemployment???

So, in her infinite wisdom, Nancy Pelosi stated that unemployment benefits were the biggest economic stimulus for this country, better than any other program. What world is she living in? People continuing to be unemployed is stimulus? All that does is stimulate more debt providing these bennies. People need to be working and there have been studies done that indicate people are turning down jobs to stay on unemployment. I am not saying we shouldn't help people, but this just perpetuates dependence on government and not on the American spirit of hard word and self reliance. Our nation could crumble under this debt. All you have to do is look at Greece and some of our states like California and Michigan. Government is not the answer to our problems, we the people are. What would stimulate this economy is lower taxes, so businesses can feel confident to hire more people. Business don't need to be burdened with over regulations which stifles productivity. While private sector jobs are being outsourced, government is ballooning. A perpetual welfare state is, to use an oft overused word, unsustainable. We need to help the truly hurting but not create dependence on government for our livelihood.

Dreadfully Boneheaded

Today we learned that Gen. Stanley McChrystal, gave a rather revealing and controversial interview to Rolling Stone magazine. In it he was highly critical of the President, the Vice President and other administration officials. We can debate the merits of his complaints, which I will get to later, but aside from that, was this a wise decision? It is no secret of tensions between him and Obama but going on the record in this way, is quite unprecedented. Military are known for publicly supporting the Commander-in-Chief, even if they disagree privately. It is hard to imagine that he could stay on in light of these comments, among them claiming that Obama seemed uncomfortable in the presence of military brass when he met with McChrystal and others not long after taking office. Another gem was when asked about Joe Biden, he responded along the lines of "what did you say? bite me?" This is most certainly beneath someone of McChrystal's stature and as I am writing this, it is reported that he offered a verbal resignation to Defense Secretary Robert Gates. He will meet with Obama tomorrow. I am sure he had legitimate frustrations and concerns but this was hardly the way to voice them. We need someone overseeing Iraq and Afghanistan who is serious and can get the job done. This article does nothing but to portray McChrystal as childish and immature.

These Boots Are Made For Shaking Down

"We will keep our boot on the throat of BP..."

Ken Salazar said it, Robert Gibbs echoed it from the podium in the briefing room. The Thug in Chief has now exerted his considerable power to make sure that BP lives up to its obligation to pay those who have been damaged by this horrific oil spill. I am not going to defend BP. It appears they were negligent and their response has certainly left much to be desired. But for the government to not only force them to do this (BP, I believe, was going to anyway) and then take the administration of the fund from BP and have an "independent" third party run it, is outrageous. BP should pay but that money does not need to be under government control. Is that really better than BP handling the funds? The overseer is none other than Ken Fineberg, the Pay Czar. How is this guy objective or independent? This whole thing has been a disaster, literally and metaphorically. Bobby Jindal can't get the resources he needs, Obama will not waive the Jones Act and rejected in writing help from the Dutch and the Brits. How arrogant and his speech the other night was nothing more than a veiled attempt to push climate change. Rahm Emmanuel is probably speaking into an ear piece "remember, man, don't let it go to waste". Instead of telling the world what we are going to do, Obama, yet again, blathered on with platitudes. He has to know he is in trouble, when James Carville, thrill up my leg Matthews and Maureen Dowd criticize him. But, unlike most presidents before him, Obama is as politically tone deaf as an out of tune piano. He is so blinded by ideology that it matters very little what this country truly needs or wants.