1. Mandate
a. A swing of 2-3% would have given the election to McCain. With nearly 50% of the voters against Barry, he can not claim a mandate. The Republicans (especially those in the Senate) must stand united and not be rolled by the democrats and the media into allowing Barry and the Liberals to do whatever they want because they were given a “mandate” by the “people” The numbers are hardly a mandate and the people voted for a pretty, handsome, eloquent first black American President not for what he said ( which was very little).
b. This means anything that would be considered a radical social or cultural shift (tax increases, gay marriage, union ballots, reinstatement of fairness doctrine, unlimited immigration, same day voter registration, liberal judges, etc
2. Electorate. An analysis of why who voted for whom is in order
a. Forget blacks, urban elite, yellow dog democrats
b. The “Franks”: registered Republicans who voted for Barry. These were those who were totally disgusted at the Bush Administration and voted Democratic not so much as for Obama but against Bush. McCain being an insider was considered Bush Lite or Bush III. A governor from the outside would have won these voters over.
c. Lukewarm Conservatives. These either did not vote or did not fight with passion. The lack of a conservative standard bearer was the cause. They felt the Party had swerved badly from its principles and had become just as bad as the Demos. Palin helped but too little too late.
d. Given a highly unpopular president, an unpopular war, a recession and a financial crisis one month before the election, it is surprising the Republicans did as well as they did. Without that last event, it would have been good chance for McCain.
3. Strategy and Tactics
a. Choice of Palin helped and did not hurt Republicans. They tactically did not use her well. Instead of sending her against the liberal press to be mauled, she should have been sent to make the rounds of the conservative radio and TV (OReilly, Sean H., Rush, etc). She should have been sent to every small town from Virginia to Minnesota spreading her message. Some complained she gave the same message. But it was the right message and telling the same story over and over could have been the winning strategy
b. McCain lost it over the Financial Crisis. He was too much insider. If instead he would have gone and fought against a government bailout, instead opting for a free enterprise solution, he might have carried the day. He needed to put his cabinet on the table early.
c. Being outspent four or five to one hurt but was not the deciding factor. See the Franks above. And the Financial crisis.
d. The media was overly liberal and pro-Barry. No doubt about it. But even the American people clearly saw a con job and knew it. They clearly understood the Media was not objective and this is going to come back to haunt the media in the next few years. The MSM (Main stream media) has seen its numbers fall steadily and that decline will continue to occur. For 2012, the New York Times and Washington Post may again be the liberal batboys but financially they will be gone and no one will be reading them except the liberal elite. ABC,, CBS, and NBC news as well as CNN and MSNBC are goners.
4. What to do next.
Some hope for 2012: a new census in 2010 which will transfer about 8-10 seats and votes from the Northeast/Midwest to the south/west and not California.
a. The mission and vision must be reviewed and returned. America is a right center country and any effort to turn it into a secular progressive paradise will fail. Newt’s research clearly shows 80-85% approve the right thoughts.
b. A shadow cabinet on the nature of the British should be formed and the Republican option for every program proposed by Barry and his boys need to be clearly stated to the American people.
c. The conservative voice will be coming from outside Washington DC. Governors provide the best chance to regain power in 2012.
d. What should be the purpose of Government? A debate and consensus on this needs to be established early.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
How to solve the automotive industry crisis without spending a $ of public monies
How to solve the Automotive Industry Dilemma (without spending one public cent)
It is actually quite easy and allows the private market to function.
America still buys and will continue to buy a large number of cars/trucks per year. The actual number might vary between 15-20 million but they still must be purchased and serviced. If they are all made domestically, then why should we care who makes them? My proposal:
a) Mandate that starting in 2009, domestic production will be emphasized. For foreign manufacturers, one import will be allowed for every 2 produced within the borders of the USA. And value added of the cars produced domestically will be highly monitored and kept at the 90-95% level. This means that the auto supplier marketplace with tier one, two, and three, will be as strong as ever.
b) Therefore Japan can sell all 15 million cars as long as they make 10 million in the US. Or China can sell as many cars as they want as long as 2/3 are produced in the US. Korea, Germany, Poland, we do not care who as long as they are produced domestically. I would prefer some local companies to survive (Ford, GM, Chrysler) but in this scenario it matters little.
c) The Big 3’s assets would become valuable and salable as auto plants must be available to produce the cars domestically. Perhaps China would buy one of the big 3 or all. Who cares? Domestic production with all the jobs would remain. Domestic sourcing would be required and remain. The dealer network would be a requirement and would still exist in one form or another.
d) Sure there would be some disruption but the market would function , the government would not need to hand out billions of bucks, and labor would still be employed.
e) Perhaps the result would have not quite as handsome of labor deals as the UAW are used to (no more job banks) and considerable labor concessions must be made (but they are going to be made anyway). At least the jobs would be here.
Or course, it is very likely that the powers to be in government want to give billions and billions of taxpayer moneys to the auto industry. After all , there is plenty more where it comes from, they are behooven to the unions, and the power would provide them with lots of sticks to make the auto industry basically a nationalized entity. But why not look at the other ways to solve this problem?
It is actually quite easy and allows the private market to function.
America still buys and will continue to buy a large number of cars/trucks per year. The actual number might vary between 15-20 million but they still must be purchased and serviced. If they are all made domestically, then why should we care who makes them? My proposal:
a) Mandate that starting in 2009, domestic production will be emphasized. For foreign manufacturers, one import will be allowed for every 2 produced within the borders of the USA. And value added of the cars produced domestically will be highly monitored and kept at the 90-95% level. This means that the auto supplier marketplace with tier one, two, and three, will be as strong as ever.
b) Therefore Japan can sell all 15 million cars as long as they make 10 million in the US. Or China can sell as many cars as they want as long as 2/3 are produced in the US. Korea, Germany, Poland, we do not care who as long as they are produced domestically. I would prefer some local companies to survive (Ford, GM, Chrysler) but in this scenario it matters little.
c) The Big 3’s assets would become valuable and salable as auto plants must be available to produce the cars domestically. Perhaps China would buy one of the big 3 or all. Who cares? Domestic production with all the jobs would remain. Domestic sourcing would be required and remain. The dealer network would be a requirement and would still exist in one form or another.
d) Sure there would be some disruption but the market would function , the government would not need to hand out billions of bucks, and labor would still be employed.
e) Perhaps the result would have not quite as handsome of labor deals as the UAW are used to (no more job banks) and considerable labor concessions must be made (but they are going to be made anyway). At least the jobs would be here.
Or course, it is very likely that the powers to be in government want to give billions and billions of taxpayer moneys to the auto industry. After all , there is plenty more where it comes from, they are behooven to the unions, and the power would provide them with lots of sticks to make the auto industry basically a nationalized entity. But why not look at the other ways to solve this problem?
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Myth of the Mandate
Now that Barry has won the election, he is eagerly putting together his first 100 days in order to effect the “Mandate” he won for “transformational Change Of America.”
Let’s see. He won the popular vote by 51-47. However, if you remove the non-votes from the ACORN group(such as the homeless man who registered 73 times to vote) and the extra votes produced by the urban democratic machines (Vote Early and Often)(A Philadelphia repair worker went to fix a broken machine BEFORE the polls opened and found considerable Barry votes already on the machine) and add those votes not counted (military absentee votes forgotten or ignored) and the numbers would be more like 50-48. That is perhaps a majority of voters but hardly a mandate. Nearly half of all voters did NOT give Barry their vote of confidence. Hardly a mandate. Reagan’s sweep of 49 states was a mandate. This was not.
America is still a nation of right of center religious hard working whose cultural values are overlooked because they are to be found in “Flyover country” nowhere near the cultural elites of San Fran, LA, NY, WDC, and Boston. Barry should thread carefully if he tries to establish the elite values as those for the country as a whole. If he tries to do so, the Republican senate minority, still enough to filibuster successfully will shut down his efforts. If he tries too hard, he will be a Carteresque one term President.
Quite frankly, Barry’s view of a Multilingual (everyone learning Spanish so the Spanish speaking illegal’s wont have to learn English), Multicultural (ditto), Multilateral (work with a corrupt UN or fearful of their shadows European Union or NATO) world-view with a “tolerant” society (hint: read Gay Marriages and non discrimination for Gays and Lesbians) that is secular (no religion) and equally distributed (income redistribution) and worker friendly (no secret ballots for unions) and gun free (good bye right to bear arms) and free speech (free for democrats but not free for anyone who opposes or dissents from their version of a liberal society) and abortion (anytime, anywhere, government paid, no parental notice) etc etc etc. You get the picture. This movie plans well in NY and San Fran but not once you cross the Hudson. And Barry, be warned, try to implement these policies and you only thought the people loved you. You sold them a bill of goods and now are trying the old bait and switch. Try to force the liberal Coast elite philosophy down their throats and the Republican win of 1994 will be replayed again in 2010.
That is the myth of the mandate. You did not get a mandate. You won a popularity contest because you were pretty, smiled nicely, and talked so sweet. You did not win because of your policies (you did not offer), You have been warned.
Let’s see. He won the popular vote by 51-47. However, if you remove the non-votes from the ACORN group(such as the homeless man who registered 73 times to vote) and the extra votes produced by the urban democratic machines (Vote Early and Often)(A Philadelphia repair worker went to fix a broken machine BEFORE the polls opened and found considerable Barry votes already on the machine) and add those votes not counted (military absentee votes forgotten or ignored) and the numbers would be more like 50-48. That is perhaps a majority of voters but hardly a mandate. Nearly half of all voters did NOT give Barry their vote of confidence. Hardly a mandate. Reagan’s sweep of 49 states was a mandate. This was not.
America is still a nation of right of center religious hard working whose cultural values are overlooked because they are to be found in “Flyover country” nowhere near the cultural elites of San Fran, LA, NY, WDC, and Boston. Barry should thread carefully if he tries to establish the elite values as those for the country as a whole. If he tries to do so, the Republican senate minority, still enough to filibuster successfully will shut down his efforts. If he tries too hard, he will be a Carteresque one term President.
Quite frankly, Barry’s view of a Multilingual (everyone learning Spanish so the Spanish speaking illegal’s wont have to learn English), Multicultural (ditto), Multilateral (work with a corrupt UN or fearful of their shadows European Union or NATO) world-view with a “tolerant” society (hint: read Gay Marriages and non discrimination for Gays and Lesbians) that is secular (no religion) and equally distributed (income redistribution) and worker friendly (no secret ballots for unions) and gun free (good bye right to bear arms) and free speech (free for democrats but not free for anyone who opposes or dissents from their version of a liberal society) and abortion (anytime, anywhere, government paid, no parental notice) etc etc etc. You get the picture. This movie plans well in NY and San Fran but not once you cross the Hudson. And Barry, be warned, try to implement these policies and you only thought the people loved you. You sold them a bill of goods and now are trying the old bait and switch. Try to force the liberal Coast elite philosophy down their throats and the Republican win of 1994 will be replayed again in 2010.
That is the myth of the mandate. You did not get a mandate. You won a popularity contest because you were pretty, smiled nicely, and talked so sweet. You did not win because of your policies (you did not offer), You have been warned.
Barry's World
We have a new President. I will not name him. For I do not consider him my president. If I met him, I would not call him mr. President. I would not acknowledge him at all. Am I being a sore loser? Maybe. Probably not. Just because he can convince 50% of the stupid American public that he is Mr. Wonderful. Just because we are now not electing leaders as President but running a Presidential Idol contest that he won because he was pretty, smiles nicely (I shall call him from now on Smiley Pete), and talks oh so sweetly (although you don’t know what he said). No, to me he Barry the punk, that inexperienced, naïve, young, former Junior Senator of all of 4 years who has accomplished nothing, whose only record is of a hazy set of poorly chosen accomplices and friends, who got by on a Billion Dollars and a Smile. Does he really think his charm and oratatory abilities will cause Putin and Iran and Venezuela and Al Queada to swan and faint at his feet like the American Public and the Main Street Media did these last 8 months? No, of course not. They will take advantage of him to America’s detriment and at some awesome yet to be paid for cost. Yet, the public loves him. And that is all that matters.
So what does Barry’s world look like? It is a world where no dissent is allowed. Nobody can say anything wrong or bad about The Leader, The One, The Messiah. It is one where history can be written and rewritten as many times as it takes to prove Our Beloved Leader believed it (Sounds like 1984 doesn’t it?) It is one where the Government is all powerful, all knowing and all punishing. You like big government now, just wait for Barry’s world. To Barry, government and government service is the ultimate. Forget capitalism and business, businessmen are greedy only interested in profits and government is the only thing between the people and poverty. In Barry’s world, Free speech is that speech that he agrees with; all other is not free and will be prohibited. In Barry’s world, government revenues should be determined in trillions and trillions. What is money but to play with and to reward those that vote correctly (that is for Barry).
The list will go on and on. I can and will write more in the few days remaining before Barry’s world becomes a reality. Barry sold the American populace on one dream and will implement his own version. Barry is the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing. He knew the American public would never agree to the world he wants so he sold himself first and now in power, he can do what he wants.
Welcome to Barry’s world. For those that voted for him, you got him. For better and especially for much much worse.
So what does Barry’s world look like? It is a world where no dissent is allowed. Nobody can say anything wrong or bad about The Leader, The One, The Messiah. It is one where history can be written and rewritten as many times as it takes to prove Our Beloved Leader believed it (Sounds like 1984 doesn’t it?) It is one where the Government is all powerful, all knowing and all punishing. You like big government now, just wait for Barry’s world. To Barry, government and government service is the ultimate. Forget capitalism and business, businessmen are greedy only interested in profits and government is the only thing between the people and poverty. In Barry’s world, Free speech is that speech that he agrees with; all other is not free and will be prohibited. In Barry’s world, government revenues should be determined in trillions and trillions. What is money but to play with and to reward those that vote correctly (that is for Barry).
The list will go on and on. I can and will write more in the few days remaining before Barry’s world becomes a reality. Barry sold the American populace on one dream and will implement his own version. Barry is the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing. He knew the American public would never agree to the world he wants so he sold himself first and now in power, he can do what he wants.
Welcome to Barry’s world. For those that voted for him, you got him. For better and especially for much much worse.
California Plague
For decades now I have heard and read of Californians deserting their homeland because it is too congested, too polluted, too expensive, unable to afford living their, government regulations, and big brotherism. So they leave that State. During the 90s the exodus was to Washington and Oregon. This decade they have migrated to Montana, Nevada, and Colorado, attracted there by the beauty, the relative few people, and the frontier aspect of those areas. Of course, once they get there, they begin lobbying to remake those states into the California they left behind. Just as Washington and Oregon have become liberal bastions, so are the other three states. Just as Massachusetts immigration have transformed New Hampshire from a Live Free or Die state to just another New England liberal outpost, so too are the Western states. I do not think we need more Californians, we need none. My suggestions for Californians thinking of moving, do us a favor: go West not East.
Monday, October 27, 2008
A Clear Choice
As I write this it is 8 days until election day. . . perhaps the most important election day this country will see this century . . . offering a clear choice.
Will the USA become the United States Socialist Republic with a massive government, government control of the economy and health care, massive redistribution of the wealth, class warfare at its worst, an imminent depression, a massive effort by the liberal left to rig the electoral process for all time through redefining hate crimes (as anyone voicing opposition of the government or its beloved leader), cutting down on free speech through intimidation and reimplementation of the Media Airwaves rule, same day voter registration thus allowing ACORN to make Chicago (vote early and often) the rule for the entire nation, extending voting rights and citizenship to all illegals in the country, and by buying off the 50% that do not pay taxes at the cost of those who do (class warfare again), creating an obligation to vote for the liberals forever.
or
a center right government that is more in tune with the vast majority of the country (85% who say they are Christian and believe in God, are Patriotic and believe in this Country, and want drill here anywhere, want less government, want less intrusion in their lives by the big brother government, want to keep the money they have earned the hard way,
it is your choice. Mine is Clear. I may not always agree with McCain or love his VP pick but to be honest he is the lesser of two evils. At least we have a chance to keep this country running if he is elected. If Barry, The One, The Messiah, i am Awesome, Look at Me, Bow Down and worship me, Obama is elected, with a democratic congress that is filibuster proof, we are headed for major depression, major diplomatic and military crises within months, a further breakdown of the economy and what could very well be a major attempt to impose one party rule. Go with the certain, the experienced, the tried and true not the naive, inexperienced, talker who expects to woo the dictators and agressors with his tongue the way he has wooed and cast a spell upon those that are gullible and innocent (the young and the liberals).
Too many of us old guys remember Carter, Clinton, remember the true JFK who was tried and tested by Krushchev and found lacking and almost caused a nuclear war. Won't we ever learn our lessons.
Is this election going to be a form of American Idol for President, the selection of the most prettiest, smootest talker or are we going to vote for a leader, a veteran. Harry Truman was not pretty, did not flatter his audience, nor was an orator but he was a leader who took the country through 7 hard post war years. We need another like Truman.
vote for McCain and Palin. Vote to give the country another chance.
Will the USA become the United States Socialist Republic with a massive government, government control of the economy and health care, massive redistribution of the wealth, class warfare at its worst, an imminent depression, a massive effort by the liberal left to rig the electoral process for all time through redefining hate crimes (as anyone voicing opposition of the government or its beloved leader), cutting down on free speech through intimidation and reimplementation of the Media Airwaves rule, same day voter registration thus allowing ACORN to make Chicago (vote early and often) the rule for the entire nation, extending voting rights and citizenship to all illegals in the country, and by buying off the 50% that do not pay taxes at the cost of those who do (class warfare again), creating an obligation to vote for the liberals forever.
or
a center right government that is more in tune with the vast majority of the country (85% who say they are Christian and believe in God, are Patriotic and believe in this Country, and want drill here anywhere, want less government, want less intrusion in their lives by the big brother government, want to keep the money they have earned the hard way,
it is your choice. Mine is Clear. I may not always agree with McCain or love his VP pick but to be honest he is the lesser of two evils. At least we have a chance to keep this country running if he is elected. If Barry, The One, The Messiah, i am Awesome, Look at Me, Bow Down and worship me, Obama is elected, with a democratic congress that is filibuster proof, we are headed for major depression, major diplomatic and military crises within months, a further breakdown of the economy and what could very well be a major attempt to impose one party rule. Go with the certain, the experienced, the tried and true not the naive, inexperienced, talker who expects to woo the dictators and agressors with his tongue the way he has wooed and cast a spell upon those that are gullible and innocent (the young and the liberals).
Too many of us old guys remember Carter, Clinton, remember the true JFK who was tried and tested by Krushchev and found lacking and almost caused a nuclear war. Won't we ever learn our lessons.
Is this election going to be a form of American Idol for President, the selection of the most prettiest, smootest talker or are we going to vote for a leader, a veteran. Harry Truman was not pretty, did not flatter his audience, nor was an orator but he was a leader who took the country through 7 hard post war years. We need another like Truman.
vote for McCain and Palin. Vote to give the country another chance.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Obamamania
Speaking of crazed americans, Obama is in the lead again. Now we are in the midst of a financial crisis with hundreds of billions of dollars on the line. And yet the American people (one can never overestimate the stupidity and gullibility of Americans) believe Barry O is the best to manage the country. This is the same man who believes higher taxes and more government spending and regulation is the cure for the country. Ever hear of the expression: the cure is worst than the disease? That is what this is. If Barry O, rock phenomen and foreign IDOL, gets to the White House and loosens his economic plan, a depression is foresure. But why then are people still for him if his presence means an economic disaster? I sure as h do not know.
Stay tuned. Perhaps the American public will awake from their comatose state and rally sufficiently to save the state. One can always hope cant they?
Stay tuned. Perhaps the American public will awake from their comatose state and rally sufficiently to save the state. One can always hope cant they?
Pigs at the trough: Have they no shame
At a time of great financial crisis, what do our members of congress do? Add pork and earmarks of course. The bill just passed by the Senate has hundreds of pages of goodies and the House has yet to add to theirs. Shouldn't they set aside their partisan habits for a few days anyway. If this is what has come of our country no wonder congress has the lowest favorability rating in history of any institution. If this Congress existed at the time of pearl harbor, no doubt a declaration of war would have taken weeks and would have ended up with a thousand pages mostly of earmarks. No true American would support such travesy.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
S*** Happens
There is a saying S*** Happens, meaning bad things occur.
It is a matter of character, judgment, and fortitude how one responds when bad things happen.
For example, 9/11 spurred Bush on to Afganistan and Iraq and taking the war to Al Quaeda. An Al Gore or BO might well have discussed why they would have wanted to have done that and what we did to incite them and what can we do to make it better--that is lots of talk and self guilt.
Sarah Palin and her daughter who is pregnant out of wedlock. Pro-life, pro-family. It happened but we stick together as a family and will love the child. BO on the other hand would have thought first of abortion and choice.
When bad things happen, that tells a lot about who you are and what you believe in.
It is a matter of character, judgment, and fortitude how one responds when bad things happen.
For example, 9/11 spurred Bush on to Afganistan and Iraq and taking the war to Al Quaeda. An Al Gore or BO might well have discussed why they would have wanted to have done that and what we did to incite them and what can we do to make it better--that is lots of talk and self guilt.
Sarah Palin and her daughter who is pregnant out of wedlock. Pro-life, pro-family. It happened but we stick together as a family and will love the child. BO on the other hand would have thought first of abortion and choice.
When bad things happen, that tells a lot about who you are and what you believe in.
2012 The Real Key Election
Forget 2008. McCain and Palin will rock. It is likely that McCain may bow out after one term. If so, Palin becomes the key player and likely candidate. Her probable democratic opponent: Hillary. Can you imagine Hillary vs Sarah. This will be the race that will transform America. The first woman president for sure.
U S S R
If Obama wins, and the Democratic (oops I mean Socialist) Party gains enough to be fillibuster proof, the first order of business will be to change the name of the country to the United States Socialist Republics for the democratic platform is for all practical purposes a socialist one.
1) Nationalize health care run and controlled by the government
2) Income redistribution on a massive scale
3) Major control of economy and all economic units
4) Major controls on an individual freedoms
5) Establishment of a new state religion, . . that of the secular progressive
6) Freedom of Speech will be revised . . . as long as someone agrees with them it is permissible but as soon as a conservative thought is spoken, it can not be allowed
7) Major new controls on environment
Just think USSR and OBama. they go toggehter like Oreos an Milk
1) Nationalize health care run and controlled by the government
2) Income redistribution on a massive scale
3) Major control of economy and all economic units
4) Major controls on an individual freedoms
5) Establishment of a new state religion, . . that of the secular progressive
6) Freedom of Speech will be revised . . . as long as someone agrees with them it is permissible but as soon as a conservative thought is spoken, it can not be allowed
7) Major new controls on environment
Just think USSR and OBama. they go toggehter like Oreos an Milk
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Palin, Hillaryites and Women
John McCain took the air right out of Obama's balloon yesterday by naming Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska as his VP candidate.
Obama has a problem with women. Hillary gathered over 18 million voters yet she was never even considered for VP. 50% of those who voted for Hillary still do not support Obama; 33% indicated they may not vote for him in November; and 20% actually indicated they would vote for McCain. That adds to up 3 million voters for McCain, a 3% gain (actually it is a two fer for McCain, he gets the 3 and Obama loses the 3).
Now comes Palin. According to most polls, McCain has the men's vote and Obama leads the women by only a few percent (traditionally, Demos have 10% or more advantage with women who are allured by the Demos usual 'caring' facade). This time it is not the case. Palin will only make the Demos look worse.
Women who filled spurned after Hillary will take a second look at Palin (and McCain). She cannot help but close the female gap. A few percentage points here and there could make all the difference inNovember.
Inexperience? Ask Barack about that. Motherhood. Labor. Outdoors. Conservative. Oil supporter. She excites the base and rallies the conservatives and evangelicals. Accomplishments? As Governor and Mayor, she has had to manager and administer entities, something Obama and Biden never have had to do.
One last thought. The Feminists and NOW have a dilemma. They have a woman on the ticket. But they will not support nor claim her because she is not the 'right ' type of woman. Their treatment and condemnation of her will show the world what they really are--just another ultra liberal organization in disguise. Mother Theresa no. Atilla the Hun maybe if he spoke pretty, was handsome, and talked the liberal party line.
Good job McCain. You are closer to clinching the championship in November.
Obama has a problem with women. Hillary gathered over 18 million voters yet she was never even considered for VP. 50% of those who voted for Hillary still do not support Obama; 33% indicated they may not vote for him in November; and 20% actually indicated they would vote for McCain. That adds to up 3 million voters for McCain, a 3% gain (actually it is a two fer for McCain, he gets the 3 and Obama loses the 3).
Now comes Palin. According to most polls, McCain has the men's vote and Obama leads the women by only a few percent (traditionally, Demos have 10% or more advantage with women who are allured by the Demos usual 'caring' facade). This time it is not the case. Palin will only make the Demos look worse.
Women who filled spurned after Hillary will take a second look at Palin (and McCain). She cannot help but close the female gap. A few percentage points here and there could make all the difference inNovember.
Inexperience? Ask Barack about that. Motherhood. Labor. Outdoors. Conservative. Oil supporter. She excites the base and rallies the conservatives and evangelicals. Accomplishments? As Governor and Mayor, she has had to manager and administer entities, something Obama and Biden never have had to do.
One last thought. The Feminists and NOW have a dilemma. They have a woman on the ticket. But they will not support nor claim her because she is not the 'right ' type of woman. Their treatment and condemnation of her will show the world what they really are--just another ultra liberal organization in disguise. Mother Theresa no. Atilla the Hun maybe if he spoke pretty, was handsome, and talked the liberal party line.
Good job McCain. You are closer to clinching the championship in November.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Guilt Trip
Yesterday (Thursday August 28), the Messiah, The ONE, spoke at his second coming at the OBama Celebrity Fest in Denver. Everyone swooned in awe as his words of total vagueness and non-specificity rocked the audience. The Media pronounced him fit for EMperor (not if only those pesky Republicans would lie down and go away).
Today we are hearing the guilt trip. If you do not vote for the Messiah, you are racist. If THE ONE loses (gasp) it is because America has not shed its racist heritage. And then, the clincher. If he loses, there will be riots in the streets as the entire black nation will rise up. And do you want that to happen? Do you want to be the one to recreate 68 in Urban America. No. Then vote for THE ONE.
It reminds me of Goldwater and johnson. Johnson put out the ad of a little girl in front of a mushroom to denote the evilous Goldwater and his militaristic streak. In essence, Johnson said, "Vote for Goldwater and we will end up over our heads in Vietname." As a friend of mine at the time said, "I did, and we did."
So now we have our warning. If you do not vote for THE ONE, evil things will happen (of course they will happen anyway but it is always nice to put the blame on your opponent).
It is also a good tactic used by magicians: keep the audience focused on one item and you will not see the other. In other words, Keep us focused on the historical first, the inevitability, the even worse calamity if not elected and we will not be concerned that we know nothing about this character let alone what he stands for and what he will do.
That alone should make it easy in November. McCain the sure thing.
Today we are hearing the guilt trip. If you do not vote for the Messiah, you are racist. If THE ONE loses (gasp) it is because America has not shed its racist heritage. And then, the clincher. If he loses, there will be riots in the streets as the entire black nation will rise up. And do you want that to happen? Do you want to be the one to recreate 68 in Urban America. No. Then vote for THE ONE.
It reminds me of Goldwater and johnson. Johnson put out the ad of a little girl in front of a mushroom to denote the evilous Goldwater and his militaristic streak. In essence, Johnson said, "Vote for Goldwater and we will end up over our heads in Vietname." As a friend of mine at the time said, "I did, and we did."
So now we have our warning. If you do not vote for THE ONE, evil things will happen (of course they will happen anyway but it is always nice to put the blame on your opponent).
It is also a good tactic used by magicians: keep the audience focused on one item and you will not see the other. In other words, Keep us focused on the historical first, the inevitability, the even worse calamity if not elected and we will not be concerned that we know nothing about this character let alone what he stands for and what he will do.
That alone should make it easy in November. McCain the sure thing.
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Two Wrongs
The saying "Two wrongs do not make a right." is applicable to Obama and Biden.
Liberal + Uber-liberal does not equal main stream.
Mr. Gaffe + Mr. "What did you say?" does not equal specificity
Naivete plus minimal equals foreign affairs disaster
Obama + Delaware is not enough to win the election
It makes me wonder why Biden was chosen. Kaine would have helped Obama with Virginia; Richardson would have guaranteed New Mexico and won over millions of hispanics; even Hillary would have firmed up the women vote. But Delaware is already won (and not even worth fighting about).
Oh well. Remember this is the same man who mere months ago said Obama was not ready to lead. A pretty good guess this will be the next McClain ad.
All in all, just another example of poor judgment by one whose Not Ready for Prime Time.
Liberal + Uber-liberal does not equal main stream.
Mr. Gaffe + Mr. "What did you say?" does not equal specificity
Naivete plus minimal equals foreign affairs disaster
Obama + Delaware is not enough to win the election
It makes me wonder why Biden was chosen. Kaine would have helped Obama with Virginia; Richardson would have guaranteed New Mexico and won over millions of hispanics; even Hillary would have firmed up the women vote. But Delaware is already won (and not even worth fighting about).
Oh well. Remember this is the same man who mere months ago said Obama was not ready to lead. A pretty good guess this will be the next McClain ad.
All in all, just another example of poor judgment by one whose Not Ready for Prime Time.
Friday, August 15, 2008
Europe Going Going Gone
A lot has been mentioned about the decline of Europe. Well it is all true. Whether it is reversible will be seen in a few days. The Russian invasion of Georgia--how else can you put it--can be responded to by the Europeans in one of two ways. It could be a wake-up call that the cold war may not be over and the Russians are not the nice guys they were made up to be. This reaction would entail instantaneous membership in NATO and the EU for Georgia, Ukraine, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and anyone else in Europe who feels threatened by the Bear. It could also mean agreeing to dismember Russia from the G-8, boycotting membership into the WTO for Russia, sanctions against Russia and a renewed military awareness for Europe. It could mean reviewing their energy options and pursuing other energy alternatives to make their reliance on Russian energy negligible. And it could mean in the long run renewed and friendlier ties with America and joint military and economic decisions.
Or it could be bury their heads in the sand, pretend it did not happen, hope the bully will go away, rationalize their behavior by saying Georgia is not of significance to Europe, and go about their decadent lives hoping to survive, thrive, another year or two until another crisis jolts them.
Which will they respond? ALl my inner bones hope the former. All of recent history hints at the latter. Let us for future sake hope they choose the right course
Or it could be bury their heads in the sand, pretend it did not happen, hope the bully will go away, rationalize their behavior by saying Georgia is not of significance to Europe, and go about their decadent lives hoping to survive, thrive, another year or two until another crisis jolts them.
Which will they respond? ALl my inner bones hope the former. All of recent history hints at the latter. Let us for future sake hope they choose the right course
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Boycott CHina NOW
At the Olympics in Beijing ramp up, now is the time to force the issue about china. When it won the Olympics in 2000, it said it would be a non-polluting games. Notice all the athletes training elsewhere and then wearing masks around the town. It is far worse than any American city has ever been. Then in 2000 it said it would make the games open and informative for the Press. Now we find the Press is off limits to large chunks of not only the city but the country and bugs and listening devices are omnipresent and the people have been warned not to talk to the worldwide press. This is being Open? Now President Bush rightly critiques their human rights policy (not just Tibet but political prisoners, et all) and he is blasted by china. Does not China know the story about People living in Glass Houses. Hypocrisy cubed.
I think it is time for a general boycott of China. Chinese goods should be boycotted. Perhaps we should rethink buying american. I know it might cost a few more pennies and we may not be able to order that appetizer the next time we dine out, but perhaps standing up for principle is something Americans should do say every hundred years or so. And right now china represents that moment.
Who is with me?
I think it is time for a general boycott of China. Chinese goods should be boycotted. Perhaps we should rethink buying american. I know it might cost a few more pennies and we may not be able to order that appetizer the next time we dine out, but perhaps standing up for principle is something Americans should do say every hundred years or so. And right now china represents that moment.
Who is with me?
Monday, August 4, 2008
Paying the Piper
Over the weekend, news reports from Obama's visits to various black organizations showed us what to expect if he is elected. Blacks have been voting for BO on a 90-10 basis from the very beginning and was the major element is his victory over Hillary. In all things you have to pay the piper and we are beginning to get a picture of what the Piper (the blacks) want from BO as a price of their unconditional allegiance.
1) Reparations. For slavery for over 150 years ago. A pure handout. My ancestors were not even here then yet I guess I (as a white) am expected to feel sorry and to place immense amounts of money to be transferred to blacks. Perhaps the liberal elites will vote for this as a assuage towards their guilt but I have none and if this were to get out in a big way, most of the non-black vote would leave BO quickly.
2) Additional affirmative action and EEO programs. MLK wanted a color blind society, not one where race becomes the critical element between winners and losers (as it was for him). Reverse discrimination is no better than any other discrimination. As has been proved, doing so actually hurts the black and makes everyone wonder if the person could have made it on his own or did he need the government's help to succeed.
3) And more government monies.
This is the price for blacks support. Perhaps all others, non-blacks, should be telling BO that if he wants our support, there is a price involved too. That is, no more race card, no more race bating, no more racism charges. If he wants to be considered a serious candidate, he must act as one. but of course if he does that, he loses any advantages he has.
1) Reparations. For slavery for over 150 years ago. A pure handout. My ancestors were not even here then yet I guess I (as a white) am expected to feel sorry and to place immense amounts of money to be transferred to blacks. Perhaps the liberal elites will vote for this as a assuage towards their guilt but I have none and if this were to get out in a big way, most of the non-black vote would leave BO quickly.
2) Additional affirmative action and EEO programs. MLK wanted a color blind society, not one where race becomes the critical element between winners and losers (as it was for him). Reverse discrimination is no better than any other discrimination. As has been proved, doing so actually hurts the black and makes everyone wonder if the person could have made it on his own or did he need the government's help to succeed.
3) And more government monies.
This is the price for blacks support. Perhaps all others, non-blacks, should be telling BO that if he wants our support, there is a price involved too. That is, no more race card, no more race bating, no more racism charges. If he wants to be considered a serious candidate, he must act as one. but of course if he does that, he loses any advantages he has.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Pretty Boy (Barry) Floyd
It appears that Barack Obama, the darling of the Media, has been crowned king by both Europe and the American media. Why? Because he is pretty, sounds nice, is eloquent, charismatic, and young (and dare we forget he is half-black!). I guess the new way to select an American President, the leader of the free world, is to emulate American Idol and create a popularity contest. In none of the descriptors above does policy, experience, judgment, and leadership show up. Do we really want to elect a pretty boy who has shown to be naive, inexperienced, and poor in judgment? The American people must wake up and think about the person they want in the oval office.
Do we want a person because the Europeans love him and want him? Or do we want one of our own?
Mccain
Do we want a person because the Europeans love him and want him? Or do we want one of our own?
Mccain
Sunday, July 27, 2008
When the process becomes the thing
The Process is the Thing
By Paul Herbig
One of the perks of being a columnist is that sometimes you can stray away from the declared theme of your columns. I have been known to mix marketing, business, politics, and social paradigms together. This I will also do today. And being a fairly modest person, if I uncover a law of the universe, I think I have the right to name it after myself:
Herbig’s Law #29: When the Process becomes more important than the output, the entity is in decline.
I once worked for a large computer company that had a very sophisticated product life cycle management system (PLCM). This in itself was not bad, it was positive in that PLCM systems help companies monitor and control the product development process. In theory (and in actuality if correctly achieved), the system allows the company to identify losing products and projects quickly and thus delete them, creating the way to add monies towards development of more likely successful and profitable products. It also served as a mechanism to identify problems in the developing products early so as to be corrected early and not inhibit the development or push back announcement or introductions of new products.
Once upon a time, the document for this company’s PLCM process was several pages. However, as time went on and bureaucracies abounded, and many products went through the PLCM process, new wrinkles and regulations and requirements were added. To understand why, one must remember that the purpose of a bureaucracy is not to succeed, just not fail. And every new requirement was added for the sole purpose of guaranteeing failures would not get into production. Every time a product would be introduced and fail or a hiccup would be seen in the PLCM process, a new set of regulations would be introduced to make certain it would not happen again.
By the time I was hired, the Phase Review process (their name for the PLCM process) was contained in two volumes, each at least 2 inches thick, and an entire set of project managers whose only purpose in life was to make certain these rules were followed exactly. And they were. At every stage of the product’s existence, the overriding question became not “Is it profitable and a successful product?” but “Have you followed the Phase Review Process?” Months and months were followed by years but the process had to be followed. In some aspects, it was successful as the only products that actually succeeded in being introduced were well thought out, crafted, nicely-configured products. The only problem was that they were usually three or four years behind the leaders and could only hope for a small niche market if any. Needless to say, this company is no longer in the industry, having abandoned it shortly after I left.
Another example, this one closer to home.: When US troops first invaded Iraq five years ago, they soon found out it was not going to be a conventional war as roadside bombs and mines started ripping up the thinly armored vehicles. Five years afterwards, the number of sufficiently armored vehicles is still in short supply. Why? Because due to previous decades’ $500 hammers and other exploits, the military procurement process had been heavily revised. Specs must be created. Everyone must have their opportunity to provide input. Suppliers must be checked out for OSHA, EEO, Diversity, EPA, and every other set of initials available. Then bidding is allowed. Afterwards, a winner is declared but then losers can appeal the process. After long (and equitable) review process, bids are finally let. Companies then can begin the production process subject to budget availability. This is an admirable process but one where the output has all been but forgotten: To win a war. In World War II, the Hellcat fighter was created from scratch within a few short months to combat the zero, contracts were let, production began, and planes built. Within two years, the fighter had swept the zeros from the sky. If this were WWII with the same military procurement process available, we would be shaking the hands of the Japanese as they approached the Potomac while still negotiating the finer points of the contract with the designated vendors.
The moral of the story: If the Process dominates in your entity, either revolutionize or bail out, the ship is beginning to list.
Paul Herbig is Managing Partner of Herbig Marketing Associates, a renown national marketing consulting firm, and the former Dean, Ketner School of Business, Tri-State University.
By Paul Herbig
One of the perks of being a columnist is that sometimes you can stray away from the declared theme of your columns. I have been known to mix marketing, business, politics, and social paradigms together. This I will also do today. And being a fairly modest person, if I uncover a law of the universe, I think I have the right to name it after myself:
Herbig’s Law #29: When the Process becomes more important than the output, the entity is in decline.
I once worked for a large computer company that had a very sophisticated product life cycle management system (PLCM). This in itself was not bad, it was positive in that PLCM systems help companies monitor and control the product development process. In theory (and in actuality if correctly achieved), the system allows the company to identify losing products and projects quickly and thus delete them, creating the way to add monies towards development of more likely successful and profitable products. It also served as a mechanism to identify problems in the developing products early so as to be corrected early and not inhibit the development or push back announcement or introductions of new products.
Once upon a time, the document for this company’s PLCM process was several pages. However, as time went on and bureaucracies abounded, and many products went through the PLCM process, new wrinkles and regulations and requirements were added. To understand why, one must remember that the purpose of a bureaucracy is not to succeed, just not fail. And every new requirement was added for the sole purpose of guaranteeing failures would not get into production. Every time a product would be introduced and fail or a hiccup would be seen in the PLCM process, a new set of regulations would be introduced to make certain it would not happen again.
By the time I was hired, the Phase Review process (their name for the PLCM process) was contained in two volumes, each at least 2 inches thick, and an entire set of project managers whose only purpose in life was to make certain these rules were followed exactly. And they were. At every stage of the product’s existence, the overriding question became not “Is it profitable and a successful product?” but “Have you followed the Phase Review Process?” Months and months were followed by years but the process had to be followed. In some aspects, it was successful as the only products that actually succeeded in being introduced were well thought out, crafted, nicely-configured products. The only problem was that they were usually three or four years behind the leaders and could only hope for a small niche market if any. Needless to say, this company is no longer in the industry, having abandoned it shortly after I left.
Another example, this one closer to home.: When US troops first invaded Iraq five years ago, they soon found out it was not going to be a conventional war as roadside bombs and mines started ripping up the thinly armored vehicles. Five years afterwards, the number of sufficiently armored vehicles is still in short supply. Why? Because due to previous decades’ $500 hammers and other exploits, the military procurement process had been heavily revised. Specs must be created. Everyone must have their opportunity to provide input. Suppliers must be checked out for OSHA, EEO, Diversity, EPA, and every other set of initials available. Then bidding is allowed. Afterwards, a winner is declared but then losers can appeal the process. After long (and equitable) review process, bids are finally let. Companies then can begin the production process subject to budget availability. This is an admirable process but one where the output has all been but forgotten: To win a war. In World War II, the Hellcat fighter was created from scratch within a few short months to combat the zero, contracts were let, production began, and planes built. Within two years, the fighter had swept the zeros from the sky. If this were WWII with the same military procurement process available, we would be shaking the hands of the Japanese as they approached the Potomac while still negotiating the finer points of the contract with the designated vendors.
The moral of the story: If the Process dominates in your entity, either revolutionize or bail out, the ship is beginning to list.
Paul Herbig is Managing Partner of Herbig Marketing Associates, a renown national marketing consulting firm, and the former Dean, Ketner School of Business, Tri-State University.
When everybody does their own thing
Having One’s Say
By Paul Herbig
In my last tome, I discussed what happens when the process becomes dominant and the output becomes subordinate. What happens when the process becomes so dominant and involved that everyone’s opinion becomes crucial and must be heard and is equally important to the final decision?
Herbig’s Law #33: When the few or individual are equated with the greater good, little if anything every gets accomplished, and the entity is inevitably headed for chaos and dissolution.
Once upon a time there were two banks, Citicorp and a formerly equally large rival. The standing joke was that at the end of every day Citicorp could tell its owners exactly how much money it made that day. Meanwhile across town, the other bank knew exactly how many minorities it had hired that day. Now, affirmative action and equal employment and diversity are notable goals. However when it dominates discussion to the exclusion of everything else, something is wrong. Please note that Citicorp is still one of the world’s great banking institutions while the other has disappeared from the lofty ranks.
In 1956, the National Defense Act was passed, paving (sic) the way for the National Interstate Highway System. In between fifteen and twenty years, nearly forty thousand miles of limited access highway was built, proving a boon to the American economic dynamo that would last to this day. Twenty or more years ago the idea surfaced that the nation (and the state) needed the I-69 corridor, the NAFTA highway. In particular, Indiana could use the highway to tie the southwest corner of the State to the rest of the state, a notion no one disputes and still is just as important today as it was then.
Almost immediately, cries went out, studies were initiated. Every initialed organization had to issue their report and comments. Everyone had to have his two cents worth. And if the authorities in charge did not listen, they filed a lawsuit so they would. Environmentalists complained then sued then stalled for time. Twenty years later the road is no closer to being built. Call it the refinery syndrome: Everyone knows it is necessary and would be beneficial to the greater good but because not all can agree on a consensus, talk continues. It is so important in our modern era that everyone be happy and agreement widespread that no agreement can ever be achieved. Meanwhile the problem only becomes worse.
Another version of this paradox can be seen in business communications. Once upon a time business managers were a hard charging bunch, vocal, loud, often seen using colorful language to describe their daily routines and struggles. These X-rated dialogues have long been diluted to G rated material. Due to EEO, sexual harassment fears, diversity issues, socio-cultural norms, the confusing laws, the unwanted media attention, many businesses are afraid to say, write, do anything because it might offend somebody so nothing gets done. Even mild and innocuous complaints and criticisms become searched for hidden messages that may harbor some tint of ill will. Messages become so bland in meaning as to be meaningless. Orders become requests become suggestions. The entire change of command becomes so involved in touch feely diversity training, the major objective of the business to be profitable, to thrive, to be successful, and to win becomes secondary or even worse, tertiary in importance.
Moral of the story: When it gets to this point, the ship is breaking up and there is no place to hide. You are sinking.
Paul Herbig is Managing Partner of Herbig Marketing Associates, a renown national marketing consulting firm, and the former Dean, Ketner School of Business, Tri-State University.
By Paul Herbig
In my last tome, I discussed what happens when the process becomes dominant and the output becomes subordinate. What happens when the process becomes so dominant and involved that everyone’s opinion becomes crucial and must be heard and is equally important to the final decision?
Herbig’s Law #33: When the few or individual are equated with the greater good, little if anything every gets accomplished, and the entity is inevitably headed for chaos and dissolution.
Once upon a time there were two banks, Citicorp and a formerly equally large rival. The standing joke was that at the end of every day Citicorp could tell its owners exactly how much money it made that day. Meanwhile across town, the other bank knew exactly how many minorities it had hired that day. Now, affirmative action and equal employment and diversity are notable goals. However when it dominates discussion to the exclusion of everything else, something is wrong. Please note that Citicorp is still one of the world’s great banking institutions while the other has disappeared from the lofty ranks.
In 1956, the National Defense Act was passed, paving (sic) the way for the National Interstate Highway System. In between fifteen and twenty years, nearly forty thousand miles of limited access highway was built, proving a boon to the American economic dynamo that would last to this day. Twenty or more years ago the idea surfaced that the nation (and the state) needed the I-69 corridor, the NAFTA highway. In particular, Indiana could use the highway to tie the southwest corner of the State to the rest of the state, a notion no one disputes and still is just as important today as it was then.
Almost immediately, cries went out, studies were initiated. Every initialed organization had to issue their report and comments. Everyone had to have his two cents worth. And if the authorities in charge did not listen, they filed a lawsuit so they would. Environmentalists complained then sued then stalled for time. Twenty years later the road is no closer to being built. Call it the refinery syndrome: Everyone knows it is necessary and would be beneficial to the greater good but because not all can agree on a consensus, talk continues. It is so important in our modern era that everyone be happy and agreement widespread that no agreement can ever be achieved. Meanwhile the problem only becomes worse.
Another version of this paradox can be seen in business communications. Once upon a time business managers were a hard charging bunch, vocal, loud, often seen using colorful language to describe their daily routines and struggles. These X-rated dialogues have long been diluted to G rated material. Due to EEO, sexual harassment fears, diversity issues, socio-cultural norms, the confusing laws, the unwanted media attention, many businesses are afraid to say, write, do anything because it might offend somebody so nothing gets done. Even mild and innocuous complaints and criticisms become searched for hidden messages that may harbor some tint of ill will. Messages become so bland in meaning as to be meaningless. Orders become requests become suggestions. The entire change of command becomes so involved in touch feely diversity training, the major objective of the business to be profitable, to thrive, to be successful, and to win becomes secondary or even worse, tertiary in importance.
Moral of the story: When it gets to this point, the ship is breaking up and there is no place to hide. You are sinking.
Paul Herbig is Managing Partner of Herbig Marketing Associates, a renown national marketing consulting firm, and the former Dean, Ketner School of Business, Tri-State University.
Kumbaya Obama
Do you remember summer camp, at night around the campfire, singing Kumbaya and praying for world peace? Or the great scenes of the beauty contest in "Miss Congeniality" where all the contestants said they wanted World Peace? Well that is exactly what I was reminded of by Obama's "World Tour." He made great speeches, talking about brotherhood, world peace, holding hands together, etc. Not much on specifics, as usual. The media swooned over his speech in Berlin comparing it to JFK and Reagan (comeon guys, get real).
Yes I would be the first to admit I would like world peace. So would most everyone on this globe. But everyone's definition of world peace is not the same. For fundamentalist Islamic radicals (call them what they are), world peace is one world with one religion, Islam, controlled by the laws of the Koran. For Hitler, Mussolini, and Tojo, world peace is one world controlled by the threesome. So beware what you ask for, you might get it.
World Peace as we want it to be must be earned, by blood if necessary as the wars of the twenieth century showed. Words alone is insufficient. If Barack thinks his charm and charisma and eloquence will convince the warlords of Iran, Syria,Korea, and Venezuela, he is in for some bitterly earned lessons of the school of hard knocks. Prepareness and readiness to use armed weapons are the only tools that keep the Dark forces at bay.
Mccain forever over the naivete of Obama. If Europe wants him, let them have him.
Yes I would be the first to admit I would like world peace. So would most everyone on this globe. But everyone's definition of world peace is not the same. For fundamentalist Islamic radicals (call them what they are), world peace is one world with one religion, Islam, controlled by the laws of the Koran. For Hitler, Mussolini, and Tojo, world peace is one world controlled by the threesome. So beware what you ask for, you might get it.
World Peace as we want it to be must be earned, by blood if necessary as the wars of the twenieth century showed. Words alone is insufficient. If Barack thinks his charm and charisma and eloquence will convince the warlords of Iran, Syria,Korea, and Venezuela, he is in for some bitterly earned lessons of the school of hard knocks. Prepareness and readiness to use armed weapons are the only tools that keep the Dark forces at bay.
Mccain forever over the naivete of Obama. If Europe wants him, let them have him.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
OBAMA politician first and foremost
While the media swoons about Obama's trips to the Mideast, if one were
to get behind the glitter and gloss and to the real events, one would find a different story with different implications. The Press telegraphed around the world shots of Barack shooting hoops with the GIs (shades of Barry in College). What they did not show and were not about to (who says they are not biased . . . ) were the treatments accorded Barack to the regular GIs. He basically ignored them, did not smile at them nor shake their hand in his effort to get to his photoshoot opportunity.
This is the kind of man we want as our commander-in-chief? He is the consumement politician and that is all. Nothing new just old as mankind itself. He only wants to get elected and could care less for the men in uniform (except that is, when it suits his purposes for the media). Not a thank you. Not a handshake. Not a nod. They are invisible to him except when it suits his purposes.
Are we going to get Hope and Change. Or much much more of the same thing if Barack were elected? I vote for the latter. The more the American people know him, the more they believe as well and will vote for "old reliable" John McCain might not make the earth move when he talks but his talks straight and from experience.
to get behind the glitter and gloss and to the real events, one would find a different story with different implications. The Press telegraphed around the world shots of Barack shooting hoops with the GIs (shades of Barry in College). What they did not show and were not about to (who says they are not biased . . . ) were the treatments accorded Barack to the regular GIs. He basically ignored them, did not smile at them nor shake their hand in his effort to get to his photoshoot opportunity.
This is the kind of man we want as our commander-in-chief? He is the consumement politician and that is all. Nothing new just old as mankind itself. He only wants to get elected and could care less for the men in uniform (except that is, when it suits his purposes for the media). Not a thank you. Not a handshake. Not a nod. They are invisible to him except when it suits his purposes.
Are we going to get Hope and Change. Or much much more of the same thing if Barack were elected? I vote for the latter. The more the American people know him, the more they believe as well and will vote for "old reliable" John McCain might not make the earth move when he talks but his talks straight and from experience.
Friday, July 25, 2008
King Barack and his heli (tank)
one of the most laughable scenes from the 1988 Presidential election is Michael Dukais in a tank with a helmet supposedly to show the world his presidential worthiness. It did exactly the opposite and was the probable cause for a most lopsided victory by Bush Senior.
Now we have another landmark occasion, King Barack, the self-appointed messiah of the Democrats and the media, in a helicopter with General Petraeus in Iraq. At least Dukakis tried to present himself as military. But in Obama's case, there were no illusions nor attempts to integrate himself into the military role (and no, playing some hoops with the troops is not a precursor to being a good commander-in-chief). After listening to a four-star general with decades of experience and a successful track record over the last 18 months indicate that although the Surge is working, it is too early to commit to any type of a withdrawal schedule and that doing so would only encourage the remnants of the opposition, King Barack with his infinite military experience (none) and vast foreign relations knowledge (none) took on his best Louis XIV attitude of "If I think it is, it must be" and "I know therefore I am." His words to the media afterwards echoed the fact that he had neither heard nor comprehended any of the general's words "Total withdrawal within 18 months by 2010 irregardless." This lack of ability to listen to experts and leaders on the ground must cast further concern about his limited and to date poor judgment.
Compare this attitude to McCain who said He would like to say withdrawal would be complete prior to the end of his presidency in 2013. However, this is dependent upon the field commanders and those most in the know. A cautionary and totally correct posture gained by decades of experience not present in his opponent.
Which one would you rather be sitting in the oval office: one who will ask and listen to the experts and leaders in the field or one who bows to political expediency and sponsors no matter the costs?
Now we have another landmark occasion, King Barack, the self-appointed messiah of the Democrats and the media, in a helicopter with General Petraeus in Iraq. At least Dukakis tried to present himself as military. But in Obama's case, there were no illusions nor attempts to integrate himself into the military role (and no, playing some hoops with the troops is not a precursor to being a good commander-in-chief). After listening to a four-star general with decades of experience and a successful track record over the last 18 months indicate that although the Surge is working, it is too early to commit to any type of a withdrawal schedule and that doing so would only encourage the remnants of the opposition, King Barack with his infinite military experience (none) and vast foreign relations knowledge (none) took on his best Louis XIV attitude of "If I think it is, it must be" and "I know therefore I am." His words to the media afterwards echoed the fact that he had neither heard nor comprehended any of the general's words "Total withdrawal within 18 months by 2010 irregardless." This lack of ability to listen to experts and leaders on the ground must cast further concern about his limited and to date poor judgment.
Compare this attitude to McCain who said He would like to say withdrawal would be complete prior to the end of his presidency in 2013. However, this is dependent upon the field commanders and those most in the know. A cautionary and totally correct posture gained by decades of experience not present in his opponent.
Which one would you rather be sitting in the oval office: one who will ask and listen to the experts and leaders in the field or one who bows to political expediency and sponsors no matter the costs?
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Obama who to obama No
It is clear that this presidential election is Obama's to win or lose. He won the primary by catering to the ultra liberal elite that controls the democratic party. But in doing so, he has alienated a multitude of groups essential to the election. Recent results are indicating that the more the general public know about the candidate, the less they like him. His flips flops, his past associations, his adamant refusal to accept the fact that Iraq is being won and has been turned around, his non-energy policy, his tax and spend issues, and above all his overt intent to use racism as a tactic against all who would criticize him or vote against him is losing him converts at an alarming rate.
1) Hillary is a lose lose proposition for him. If he accepts her as VP, he will be cast as just another politician and her presence will galvanize conservatives who hate her more than him. If he does not, millions of hillarites will not vote or worse yet will vote for McCain.
2) The more he leans towards the center, the more his liberal base becomes worrisome and more than a few might turn to the more liberal candidates (Nader). The more he moves towards the center, the more he flip flops and few can honestly say what he really means.
3) Although he might galvanize blacks to vote for him (why is it a white not voting for Obama is racist but a black who chooses to vote only for Obama is not being racist but rationale?), but for every additional black vote two or more southern Reagan democrats will switch to vote for McCain.
4)Blue collar voters, key to the Rust belt states of Michigan, pennyslvania, Ohio and perhaps Wisconsin as well, are highly patriotic and tend to support McCain because of his track record. It is likely three or more of these states will go to McCain.
5) Although the media is in awe of Obama and have already crowned him King, many are still uncertain. The Reagan factor takes hold here. In the Carter-Reagan race of 1980, it was polled as a dead heat; in actuality Reagan won by a landslide. What happened there is likely to happen this year as well. It was PC to vote for Carter. And many remarked they would to pollsters. However, when they were in the ballot box, the only people that knows how they vote are they themselves and the God Almighty. They thought to themselves and said I could not in all honesty (and despite the PC) vote for Carter and pulled the lever for Reagan. I foresee a sufficient percentage of these voters in 2008, enough to carry the Rust Belt states for McCain.
My prediction: Mccain 320 electoral votes--all of the Republican L including Virgina, NM, and Colorado, and the Upper Midwest including Ohio, Penn, Michigan and perhaps even Wisconsin
Obama 220.
The Media will be awestruck by the ignorance of the public but the public will prevail for the next four years at least.
1) Hillary is a lose lose proposition for him. If he accepts her as VP, he will be cast as just another politician and her presence will galvanize conservatives who hate her more than him. If he does not, millions of hillarites will not vote or worse yet will vote for McCain.
2) The more he leans towards the center, the more his liberal base becomes worrisome and more than a few might turn to the more liberal candidates (Nader). The more he moves towards the center, the more he flip flops and few can honestly say what he really means.
3) Although he might galvanize blacks to vote for him (why is it a white not voting for Obama is racist but a black who chooses to vote only for Obama is not being racist but rationale?), but for every additional black vote two or more southern Reagan democrats will switch to vote for McCain.
4)Blue collar voters, key to the Rust belt states of Michigan, pennyslvania, Ohio and perhaps Wisconsin as well, are highly patriotic and tend to support McCain because of his track record. It is likely three or more of these states will go to McCain.
5) Although the media is in awe of Obama and have already crowned him King, many are still uncertain. The Reagan factor takes hold here. In the Carter-Reagan race of 1980, it was polled as a dead heat; in actuality Reagan won by a landslide. What happened there is likely to happen this year as well. It was PC to vote for Carter. And many remarked they would to pollsters. However, when they were in the ballot box, the only people that knows how they vote are they themselves and the God Almighty. They thought to themselves and said I could not in all honesty (and despite the PC) vote for Carter and pulled the lever for Reagan. I foresee a sufficient percentage of these voters in 2008, enough to carry the Rust Belt states for McCain.
My prediction: Mccain 320 electoral votes--all of the Republican L including Virgina, NM, and Colorado, and the Upper Midwest including Ohio, Penn, Michigan and perhaps even Wisconsin
Obama 220.
The Media will be awestruck by the ignorance of the public but the public will prevail for the next four years at least.
Obama-mania
Today in Europe, Europeans are cheering on Obama as if he were the second coming. Now if only they could vote in the US election . . . probably a good thing they can't. Yet what are they cheering about. Obama is not Bush. Obama is more Multilateral, Multicultural, International than other American candidates. But is that really better? Do most Americans want to become like most Europeans . . socialist, government dominated economies, stagnant, secular, socially and morally decaying, and bit by bit being assimilated into Islam due to appeasement policies? I would answer no.
Who is this obama? He is pretty. He speaks eloquently. He is charismatic. He talks about change and hope but try to get past those two words. It appears that he HOPES the american public does not notice he wants to CHANGE them to his most liberal notions. WHat experience does he have? No private sector. No military. Nothing beyond law and public sector. What does he know about foreign policy? Nothing. His views of foreign policy is talk, obviously he believes he can charm foreign dictators the way he has seemingly charmed American liberals and media (is he in for a surprise). Some proclaim him the next JFK. Obviously, they have not read the history books. JFK's foreign naiveness and lack of preparedness caused the Bay of Pigs, allowed Krushchev to build the Berlin Wall without "preconditions" or American intervention, put us in Vietnam, and nearly escalated to a nuclear war with the Cuban Missile Crisis. And we want another JFK wannabe in the white house? Lord forbid what we may end up.
They want Obama because he is no Bush. Carter was elected because he was not Nixon in a post watergate backlash. Look what happened to Carter: Afghanistan was invaded by the Russians, Nicaragua and El Salvador, Stagflation, the Shah left Iran and created today's Iranian situation, Energy controls and almost rationing of gasoline through long gas lines. And this is what we want? Another Carter just to get rid of Bush? THere is an old saying: Beware of what you want, you might just get it.
Obama, the next JFK with Carterian overtones. Pity America in a few years.
Who is this obama? He is pretty. He speaks eloquently. He is charismatic. He talks about change and hope but try to get past those two words. It appears that he HOPES the american public does not notice he wants to CHANGE them to his most liberal notions. WHat experience does he have? No private sector. No military. Nothing beyond law and public sector. What does he know about foreign policy? Nothing. His views of foreign policy is talk, obviously he believes he can charm foreign dictators the way he has seemingly charmed American liberals and media (is he in for a surprise). Some proclaim him the next JFK. Obviously, they have not read the history books. JFK's foreign naiveness and lack of preparedness caused the Bay of Pigs, allowed Krushchev to build the Berlin Wall without "preconditions" or American intervention, put us in Vietnam, and nearly escalated to a nuclear war with the Cuban Missile Crisis. And we want another JFK wannabe in the white house? Lord forbid what we may end up.
They want Obama because he is no Bush. Carter was elected because he was not Nixon in a post watergate backlash. Look what happened to Carter: Afghanistan was invaded by the Russians, Nicaragua and El Salvador, Stagflation, the Shah left Iran and created today's Iranian situation, Energy controls and almost rationing of gasoline through long gas lines. And this is what we want? Another Carter just to get rid of Bush? THere is an old saying: Beware of what you want, you might just get it.
Obama, the next JFK with Carterian overtones. Pity America in a few years.
Energy or environment
It appears the democrats have never heard about the fine art of trade off and compromise. In the current situation of $5 gas, the need to do everything the country can do to move towards energy independence is critical. However, their response and one that has been their response for decades has been: nothing that will endanger the environment. Not one caribou can be disturbed while Middle America lies in ruins because of oil induced recession. Even the mere thought of a drop of oil on any pristine beach is enough to keep the thermostats in the North at 50 degrees this winter. Forget drilling for oil anywhere, using the oil shale available, or the immense coal resources. The democratic password is alternative fuels (in twenty, thirty, or forty years). No Nuclear. No coal. No oil. What are citizens suppose to do to keep warm this winter or to fuel their tank to get to work? Cut down trees?
The usual Democratic response is to carpool. Most :"fly-over" Americans live miles from where they work and nowhere near their coworkers. Ride a bike or walk: 20 miles?
Move to where they would be close to their work: Sell a house that has been severely devalued over the previous two years while in a recessionary area and buy one near a plant where you might or might not be employed for the next few years. Not an economically attractive idea. Sell your guzzler and buy a hybrid. You probably owe more on the car then it is worth and where are you going to get 30 thou right now? no, none of the democratic stock answers will work in fly over America.
The correct response is to do everything (oil drilling, coal plants, nuclear, oil shade and alternative energy) at the same time and allow the free markets to determine how it all shakes out. Government has never been a good selector of winners and losers and does more damage than it betters.
Democrats--staying the course on this oil (or rather no oil) philosophy will cost you the election this year. Of course, if that is what you want . . . adhere to your liberal orthodoxy regardless of outcome, fine.
The usual Democratic response is to carpool. Most :"fly-over" Americans live miles from where they work and nowhere near their coworkers. Ride a bike or walk: 20 miles?
Move to where they would be close to their work: Sell a house that has been severely devalued over the previous two years while in a recessionary area and buy one near a plant where you might or might not be employed for the next few years. Not an economically attractive idea. Sell your guzzler and buy a hybrid. You probably owe more on the car then it is worth and where are you going to get 30 thou right now? no, none of the democratic stock answers will work in fly over America.
The correct response is to do everything (oil drilling, coal plants, nuclear, oil shade and alternative energy) at the same time and allow the free markets to determine how it all shakes out. Government has never been a good selector of winners and losers and does more damage than it betters.
Democrats--staying the course on this oil (or rather no oil) philosophy will cost you the election this year. Of course, if that is what you want . . . adhere to your liberal orthodoxy regardless of outcome, fine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
