Category Archives: Barack Obama

Note to Barack Obama: Follow the leader. His name is “John McCain.”

“Senator Obama did what he does best: He’s remaining calm, seeking advice, forming a consensus, and waiting to see which way the political winds blow.”
Wednesday, September 24, 2008

No less an authority on life than Woody Allen once observed that “Eighty percent of success is just showing up.” Apparently Senator Obama never got the memo. Oh, he’s showed up to run for President alright, since he was 10 years old according to legend. Unfortunately, that qualifies him to be a candidate, but little else.

Today, in the midst of what our government tells us – but I don’t buy – is our greatest financial crisis since the Great Depression, Senator McCain called Senator Obama to suggest a joint, non-partisan statement on the subject, and to recommend that Friday’s debate be postponed to allow them both to go to Washington where our Congressional leaders who are sincerely interested in being part of the solution belong.

Instead of agreeing to the postponement, Senator Obama did what he does best: He’s remaining calm, seeking advice, forming a consensus, and waiting to see which way the political winds blow. It’s good to be laid back, so I’ve heard. It’s not a something I have time to be. Too much to worry about, I guess. I don’t know about you, but I want a President who gets excited now and then, who feels my angst and maybe shows some occasional frustration in the face of a government that’s not even close to working.

It’s reassuring to know that Senator Obama talks to Congressional and Administration leaders over the phone as he explained at today’s press conference. That’s great. All he needs to run the government is a cell phone. Think of the all money we’ll save. And he told them if he’s needed in Washington, just let him know and he’ll be there. Translation: That’s campaign-speak for “I’m busy running for President. Wake me when the crisis is over.” Senator McCain is not waiting for anyone to call, and deserves credit for taking the initiative.

Was suggesting the postponement a political ploy, a desperate measure given his recent slipping in the polls? One poll shows him down by 10 points, but that’s unlikely. Others show him down by only two, within the margin of error. Sure. Maybe. I don’t know, nor do I care. What’s becoming apparent is that Senator McCain’s in the fight of his life, and so is our country. They’re a good match.

Now could someone please remind me which one of the two candidates is the old one?


Site Meter

Dear Senator Obama:

“… how about if you stop accusing Senator McCain of “flip-flopping” just because he has the intelligence and experience to have a less than simple-minded, formulaic approach to resolving our many national problems?”
Sunday, September 21, 2008

Hello. Because I know you are sincerely committed to quality and continuing education, I would like to make the following two points about your campaign’s interpretation of Senator McCain’s recent statements about the economy. Here goes…

1. It is entirely possible and often the case that the fundamentals of our economy would be strong, even while the economy itself is dealing with serious problems. You, for example, are working hard to become President of the United States. In the process, you have had a number of problems, such as the mess with Reverend Wright, and yet, throughout it all, I’m sure you never doubted that the fundamentals of your person and your campaign remained strong – strong enough to recover with a major taxpayer subsidy. See how easy that was?

By the way, on this first point, if the fundamentals of our economy were not strong, how do you explain the way the difficulties at Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Lehman Brothers, Constellation Energy and others are resolving themselves – and doing so without government assistance? How do you explain the way our banking system continues to function – albeit a bit skittishly, which is to be expected in light of the profoundly negative prognosis we keep hearing from Washington? There is and will continue to be less credit available, at higher costs to more accurately reflect risk, but then the problem we’re trying to correct is that there was too much credit available at rates which were too low. Tightening the availability of credit is the whole idea of “The Big Fix” our Congress is about to debate. If the fundamentals of our economy are not strong, how is it that economy is moving so quickly to repair itself?

2. It is also entirely possible to be generally opposed to government intervention in the economy, while at the same time being in favor of some specific regulatory programs. I am, for example, adamantly opposed to our buying the bad debt these various financial institutions are carrying on their books, in favor of allowing the economy to handle that problem on its own, while at the same time being in favor of limited regulations designed to prevent the continued origination of such paper and its derivatives. What’s wrong with that?

I suspect that both you and especially Senator McCain agree that we need to leave our economy alone, within limits designed to prevent adverse practices which tend to escape the natural self-correcting tendencies of our capitalist system. The only debate between you and Senator McCain is the extent of those limits, Senator McCain being less restrictive than you seem to be.

Certainly, Senator Obama, you’re not suggesting that your approach to economic, social and national security policies is “all or nothing,” that we should do everything one way or another according to some rigid doctrine without the common sense flexibility to make adjustments depending upon circumstances. Of course not. So, how about if you stop accusing Senator McCain of “flip-flopping” just because he has the intelligence and experience to have a less than simple-minded, formulaic approach to resolving our many national problems? …and I’ll ask him and his campaign to do the same for you.

Thank you.


Site Meter

The Economics and Irresponsibility of Barack Obama’s Scare Tactics

Continuing to say whatever he thinks will get him elected.
Monday, September 15, 2008

This is very simple. To a great extent, the success of our economy depends upon the positive expectations of our entrepreneurs and consumers.

Senator McCain tells us that the fundamentals of our economy are strong. Senator Obama responds by telling us that McCain is lost in space, that the fundamentals of our economy are not strong, and that we’re in deep trouble.

Personally, I think Senator McCain is correct, that our fundamentals are strong, that these adjustments are what a troubled, but basically healthy economy does to fix itself. It’s part of a natural process in the context of which our government needs to help those who are adversely affected – short of saving the companies and the government policies which encouraged or allowed the current mess to happen in the first place.

Whether or not Senator McCain is right, the one thing I know for sure is that doomsday talk from Senator Obama has got to have a depressing effect on consumer and entrepreneur confidence. He’s creating a self-fulfilling prophecy for which voters should hold him responsible. Does he really think that telling us again and again that we’re in serious trouble won’t have a negative impact on the rate at which large and small businesses invest in growth and create new jobs? Does he think the American consumer will be encouraged by his negativism to buy homes and increase their expenditures for consumer products?

How irresponsible. And Senator Obama has the nerve to say that Senator McCain doesn’t get it.

Senator Obama’s a bright guy who, I think, understands the consequences of his rhetoric. It’s just that he cares more about getting elected, than about the jobs and incomes of the people he keeps promising he’ll protect. And if I’m wrong, and he doesn’t understand, well then he’s an amateur making a rookie mistake, and clearly not ready to manage our government. Either way, whether it’s the ethics of his politics or understanding of the economy that’s the problem, are you willing to elect him President of the United States?


Site Meter

Johnny Obama Come Lately

“Senator Obama keeps telling us he’s going to change everything. So what’s he waiting for?”
Monday, September 15, 2008

So when, exactly, did it occur to Senator Obama that he was going to change the way Washington does business? The simple answer is that it never has. It’s all talk calculated to win the Presidency. How can I be so sure? For those of us who still believe the old adage, that actions speak louder than words, consider the following:

1. What’s he been doing since he was elected to the US Senate to convince us his commitment to change is credible, and to prove that his ability to accomplish change is truly something in which we can believe?

According to Senate voting data published by the Washington Post(1), during the 110th Congress Barack Obama voted with his party 96.0% of the time. Make no mistake about it, Barack Obama is an establishment Democrat. “If it walks like a duck…”

His party, not incidentally, was in control of both houses. To what end? Which of the new “agent of change” programs on his website has he attempted to put in place during the time he’s been in office? What, precisely, has he done to change the way our government operates? How hard has he tried? In what specific ways has he succeeded? Where is all the innovative, bipartisan legislation he keeps promising? Was that what he was busy preparing during the 291 votes (45.5% of the total) he missed during the 110th Congress? Too busy running for office, too busy talking about change to make any happen?

2. Why select the consummate Washington insider as his running mate?

For Vice President he selects Joe Biden for his foreign policy experience, a card carrying member of the Washington establishment Senator Obama insists he’s going to turn inside out. If he wanted Senator Biden’s advice, he could have had it from Biden’s vantage point inside the Senate where his power and ability to help a President Obama pass all that new legislation would have worked to his – and our – advantage. He could have made Biden Secretary of State or a foreign affairs or national security advisor. The fact is, he mistakenly thought that adding Joe Biden to the ticket would counter concerns about his (Senator Obama’s) lack of relevant experience, Biden’s “old school,” establishment background and relationships notwithstanding. Change had nothing to do with it. Picking his Vice President was just one more missed chance for Senator Obama to prove the substance of his rhetoric.

3. Why stop asking for earmarks?

In fiscal 2008 alone, Senator Obama requested 112 “earmarks” totaling $330 million, but none for fiscal 2009.(2) Now that’s a change alright, but why wait until now, until the McCain campaign calls him to task, his lead in the polls evaporating? If earmarks were signs of the old Washington establishment he plans to change, why not start by setting an example the first day he arrived in the Senate? In his first three years in office, Senator Obama earmarked funding for 326 special projects costing a total of $860.6 million.(3) That must have been before he had the epiphany that he could change all this squandering.

Senator Obama keeps telling us he’s going to change everything. So what’s he waiting for? The simple and intentionally sarcastic conclusion is that he’s apparently saving that torrent of change he’s been holding back until he’s elected President. It’s the ultimate “trust me” candidacy, but why should we?

References:
(1) Senator Obama’s Voting History Published by the Washington Post
(2) CNN On-Line Article About Earmarks Requested by Senator Obama
(3) Taxpayers for Common Sense Study of Earmarks Requested by Senator Obama


Site Meter

The Infallibility of Barack Obama

Monday, September 8, 2008

Senator Obama accuses Governor Palin – who he has apparently decided to run against rather than Senator McCain – of “flip flopping” on the issue of the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere.” In fact, she did change her mind. But so what?

The question which Senator Obama should be asking is, “Why?” Was it for political expedience which would be wrong, or for good reason in which case she did the right thing. Changing your mind is not, Senator Obama, an inherently bad thing. Quite to the contrary, it’s an often essential part of every process which demonstrates an open-mindedness, intellectual flexibility and a willingness to learn from experience which we considerable desirable traits, particularly in the President of the United States.

At the same time, Senator Obama has been reluctant to admit that The Surge has succeeded. What praise he has allowed the strategy has been qualified by atypically awkward attempts to define other considerations which have to be taken into account.

So what’s the harm in admitting something so reasonable as that, while you adamantly opposed The Surge when it was first advocated, in retrospect you concede you were incorrect, and move on? We all know you were incorrect, and that Senator McCain was right. To paraphrase your own words today, “Do you think the American people are stupid?” So you were wrong. It happens.

The fact is, I don’t believe in the concept of a President, particularly one with your meager experience, who never makes a mistake. And I certainly don’t want to vote for a candidate who can’t admit it when he does.


Site Meter

A Meaningful Comparison of the Voting Records of Senators Obama and McCain

“…they are clearly nowhere nearly as far apart as the Obama Campaign wants us all to believe.”
Sunday, September 7, 2008

Senator Obama loves to tell us, again and again, how Senator McCain voted with President Bush 90% of the time – and then asks whether or not we want to take only a 10% chance on change. Needless to say, the latter assumption doesn’t follow from the 90% voting record he’s quoting. It’s a joke to suggest that it does, but we’ll cut the Senator a break and chalk it up to what he thinks is clever writing. My problem is with the assumption that he (Senator Obama) must have voted substantially differently than Senator McCain.

And so it occurred to me… Forget about how often Senator McCain voted with President Bush. I’d like to compare the two Senators’ voting records to each other. Of course, Senator Obama hasn’t been in office for all that long, so what I’ve done is compare their voting records during the 110th Congress.

As you’re about to see in the enclosed spreadsheet, I went to a Washington Post website and compared their voting records with respect to 31 votes during the period Februay 10, 2005 through August 3, 2007 – votes which the Washington Post considered the “most important bills, nominations and resolutions that have come before Congress. …based on an analysis of the potential impact of the legislation on policy and politics.”

Here’s a summary of what I found. The enclosed spreadsheet has a complete list of the 31 votes. Please go to the Washington Post website showing in the spreadsheet for a detailed description of each vote.

Senator Barack Obama…
Voted on 29 of the 31 total votes.
Voted with the Republican (GOP) opinion 27.59% of the time.
Voted with Senator McCain 34.48% of the time.

Senator John “Maverick” McCain…
Voted on 25 of the 31 total votes.
Voted with the Democrat (DEM) opinion 40.00% of the time.
Voted with Senator Obama 40.00% of the time.

No question about, Senators Obama and McCain have differing points of view about legislation and how our government should be run – but they are clearly nowhere nearly as far apart as the Obama Campaign wants us all to believe. Not only that, these voting records data tend to support Senator McCain’s assertion that he is a “maverick” who has consistently demonstrated a willingness to vote his mind, for what he thinks is best for his country regardless of his party’s line. Presumably, the same is true for Senator Obama – except that, for some reason, he’s avoided making that point.

Here the link to the spreadsheet…
Obama and McCain Voting Records


Site Meter

Accepting Responsibility for the Uselessness of Congress

Saturday, September 6, 2008

The Obama campaign is fond of reminding us that the Bush Administration has been a pathetic excuse for government, arguing in the process that a John McCain Presidency will be nothing more than a reincarnation of it, which I don’t buy.

Will someone – perhaps the McCain campaign if anyone over there is listening – please remind Senators Obama and Biden that it’s been a Democrat-controlled Congress for the past two years, including both of them in the Senate, and ask them what they have to show for it? Ask Senator Obama why, if he’s President, and without any profound change in the party mix in both houses, will Congress be any more productive or helpful in accomplishing his agenda?


Site Meter

Obama/Palin: The Politics of Race Versus Gender

Saturday, August 30, 2008

In her speech in Dayton on Friday, when she was introduced by Senator McCain as his running mate, Governor Palin went out of her way to call upon women voters to help her, on their behalf, be elected Vice President. Now only 44, even if McCain were to serve a full 8 years, she’d only be 52 years old when she runs for President at the head of her own ticket.

“It was rightly noted in Denver this week,” she said, “that Hillary left 18 million cracks in the highest, hardest glass ceiling in America. But it turns out the women of America aren’t finished yet, and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all.”

Her objective is perfectly clear. Women need to vote for me to quash the notion that there are limits to what women can do, to the authority and power they can command. Running the country isn’t something women can and will do eventually. It’s something they are ready to do now.

It’s a point which begs the question of whether or not she, Sarah Palin personally, would be an effective President. It could be a case of “right time, wrong candidate” which I’ve made in previous postings about Barack Obama’s campaign. It’s not that we’re not ready for a black President. It’s that Barack Obama, personally, is the wrong black candidate for the job.

Here we have Governor Palin encouraging women to vote for her because she is a woman. There may be other reasons, of course, but gender has got to be high on the short list. Hilary Clinton wasn’t quite so direct, but did frequently remind prospective women voters that her nomination and election would be historic. I’m sure they got the point.

Senator Obama’s nomination and election would also be historic, but for different reasons and, I think, to a lesser extent. From slave to President is a long road, the journey down which is a matter of pride for all Americans as an affirmation of our democracy, and of the self-correcting tendencies of a free society. African Americans are, however, a significant, but relatively small minority of our country.

Women, on the other hand, are half. Their having been discriminated against for so long, in the private and public sectors of our economy, is not only also unforgivable, it has been monumentally inefficient. The unfairness of it all notwithstanding, we have deprived the economy (and government) of the full capabilities of half the population. (It’s something pure capitalism would never have done. It had to be personal.) Fortunately, while discrimination against black and female Americans still exists, it is waning fast and quickly becoming a non-issue right before our eyes. Do we owe Barack Obama or Hilary Clinton anything for proving the point? No. They are just the current beneficiaries of changes in our society which were encouraged by activists, well known and obscure, throughout our history, who forced our country to pay attention.

Unfortunately for the Obama campaign, race doesn’t have equal status in politics. He can’t, as easily, stand up and encourage black people to vote for him precisely because he is black. There’s no point, and it could be counterproductive. Black Americans are going to vote for him anyway, as they have already demonstrated in the primaries. No, what he needs to do is dare white people not to vote for him on the grounds of his race. It’s a pitch which may have worked for many of his Rally People, not to mention an adoring media in the early stages of his campaign, but it’s a more subtle, negative argument which is a much harder sell to the electorate at large than the call to arms Governor Palin is making.


Site Meter

Lack of Experience: The Perverse Argument of John McCain Against Barack Obama

Saturday, August 30, 2008

Political analysts everywhere, working on behalf of the Obama campaign and for the media, have been making the point that McCain’s adding Sarah Palin to his ticket robs him of his argument about Barack Obama’s inexperience.

According to some of those pundits, McCain has opted instead to focus on ideology to energize his conservative base, and on broadening the appeal of his campaign to middle and working class voters. Not incidentally, he’s also re-pitched himself as the real candidate for change by bringing in a Washington outsider – in stark contrast to Obama’s choice of Senator Biden, the consummate Washington insider – who (Sarah Palin) just happens to be a woman.

I disagree that John McCain has taken the experience argument off the table. Quite to the contrary, I think he’s upped the ante on precisely that point. Thanks to Sarah Palin, the Obama campaign cannot argue that she is inexperienced without pointing out, at the same time, the lack of experience of their own standard bearer. They’re making McCain’s point for him.

The fact is, in many important respects Governor Palin is actually more experienced than Senator Obama. More to the point, even if she is relatively inexperienced, she’s only running for Vice President. If Senator Obama would like to switch positions with Joe Biden, that is, let Senator Biden run for President and Senator Obama be his running mate, comparisons between Obama and Palin might make more sense. Unfortunately, Barack Obama is the head of his own ticket. He’s running for President. Governor Palin is only running for Vice President.

Look for the Obama campaign to suppress arguments attacking Palin’s inexperience, and to downplay his signature issue of being the agent of change. That leaves him with arguing that McCain is a Bush clone who “doesn’t get it” – and those are now significantly weaker arguments than they were before Sarah Palin – a working class woman and Washington outsider, that’s been a mayor and now governor — was added to the Republican ticket.


Site Meter

“No way. No how. No kidding.”

“…unfortunately neither Senator Clinton nor Harriet Tubman
is running for President.”

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

In deference to Senator Clinton, her actual words in last night’s rousing speech before the Democratic Convention were, “No way. No how. No McCain.” It may have been good political theater, but unfortunately neither Senator Clinton nor Harriet Tubman is running for President.

Nor will political theater pay anyone’s bills or solve our nation’s many other problems. But I get it. The Democrats are psyching themselves up for the victory they want and anticipate in November. Good for them, and good for the Republicans who are up next.

So why do I feel so uninspired, so disappointed? I’ve thought about it, and the answer is that I’ve had it with form over substance, with the audacity of the presumption that I will be impressed, in any meaningful way, by all this hoopla and rhetoric.

On Thursday, Senator Obama is going to make his acceptance speech at the Denver stadium in front of 76,000+ supporters. His objective is to define his campaign as a bona fide movement, the scope of which transcends what any ordinary convention center can adequately accomodate. The arrogance of it all is unbelievable.

Does Senator Obama really think that hearing the roar and chanting of a stadium full of supporters will make his pitch any more substantive, any more convincing, that it will somehow make him better than his resume? Of course he does. He has to. Like all great magic, the trick is in distracting the audience from what’s really going on. This is the new politics, the “Change You Can Believe In” he’s promised.

As President, will Senator Obama be addressing the nation from The Oval Office, or from FedExFied, the new Redskins stadium? I’m just wondering if any of us can afford the price of season tickets.


Site Meter