Changing Hearts and Minds through Weakness

I have to give President Barack H. Obama credit.  He has changed my mind on the prospects of taking action against the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria in the face of alleged – and all but certain – use of chemical weapons against opposition forces and civilians.

My nut is not an easy nut to crack.  I have long-held the personal belief that the United States held a special place in the community of nations.  It’s a place – to my own thinking and values – where a World Superpower belongs.  It’s the role that goes beyond the kind of standard-setting usually the purview of the United Nations.  It’s the role of enforcing those standards of common decency when it comes to the bitter realities of armed conflict.

A lot of Americans will categorize this simplistically as the role of World Cop.  Many disagree with me on this premise, that our country should be involved in events overseas that appear to have little or no direct impact on U.S. interests.

Those sentiments are well-founded and reflect the commonly held belief that American military personnel and U.S. treasure should be risked only in those situations linked to National Security in almost all cases.  So maybe my viewpoint is quite firmly in the minority.

Yet it is a role that in my mind comes with being a World Leader and Superpower.  It is a role we have filled many times in the past in various regions of the world in varying degrees of participation.

images-1I am not fond of unilateral U.S. action.  I do not favor the use of American boots-on-the-ground, especially in a situation like Syria.  What I look for is an American-led process of Consensus Building; the development of a common sense and purpose amongst our primary allies, major world powers, and those countries in closest proximity to the danger and most likely to be affected by any widening of a regional conflict.

My view is of the United States as The Point Man on the diplomatic front and The Muscle when it comes to the military response for which we hold a decided advantage (i.e. technological, hardware, delivery systems, weaponry).  When it comes to boots on the ground, the only enforcement situation where this should apply – in my humble opinion – is as part of a multi-national approach to a controllable environment (e.g. Bosnia; Clinton 1999) or where an immediate U.S. response would be sufficiently overwhelming (e.g. Grenada; Reagan 1983).

Now when it comes to Syria, President Obama has sufficiently altered the course of my thinking in a situation where a struggling regime gassed an overmatched military uprising and a defenseless civilian population …

… for all the wrong reasons.

Introducing the Freedom Muffin! Introducing the Freedom Muffin!

Suddenly, under his mislaid concept of “leadership”, the U.S. looks timid, indecisive, and unfocused.  American efforts to build an International Coalition of the Willing was shot in the foot by its biggest allie (Great Britain) before it even got rolling.  (WIll we have to rename the English muffin?)

The Office of the President – long The Decider when it comes to the use of U.S. military power in short, direct, and sometimes personal (Libya, Muammar Gaddafi, 1986) responses to violations of international norms – appears confused by Britain’s rejection and unsure as to what to do next.

Instead the country’s Decider punted the issue – just as British Prime Minister David Cameron did – to the Legislator.  From my perspective, this has the look of a President hoping someone will get him off the fish-hook he firmly set in his own mouth.  When you use terms like “red line”, you had better have a plan of action with several iterations to account for unexpected developments like your Biggest International Allie getting cold feet.

The alternative, fall-back strategy?  Apparently there wasn’t one.  Which leads one to the obvious question … Who was doing the Leading?  Right now, it looks like Cameron and the Brits.

Where's Margaret Thatcher when you need her? Where’s Margaret Thatcher when you need her?

So now Syria mocks us.

To fill the role of International Leader, you must be convinced of your Righteousness; firm in your ability to Lead, even if it means you must lead without your closest friends and allies at your side; and when all else fails, you must be prepared for bold action if necessary and if supported by the facts.

These are the kind of considerations President Obama should have kept in mind before speaking of “red lines” in August 2012.  Obviously he and his National Security team didn’t.

And this is what ultimately changed my mind.

If you can not be a strong, prepared, flexible leader, you have no business  drawing lines; making promises; and scheduling attacks when you do not have the backbone for the toughest decisions … actually sending Americans to clean up the World’s ugliest messes.

God help the Syrian people …

‘Twas the Night before Furlough

Enjoy a little Christmas in July with me and my fellow Federal civil servants with this twist on an ageless classic.

Twas the Night before Furlough

Concept and execution if not the actual words

by Barack H. Obama

Santa Jack Lew with furloughs for you!

Santa Jack Lew with furloughs for you!

‘Twas the night before Furlough
And all through The White House,
Not a creature was stirring,
Barack had Droned the last Mouse!

Congress was nestled all snug with The Fed
While visions of Mid-Terms danced in their heads.
With Michelle in her kerchief and POTUS in his cap,
The First Couple was hankerin’ for a Hawaiian recess.

When on the South Lawn there arose such a clatter,
Barack leapt from his bed to see what was the matter!
Away to the window he stumbled and crashed,
Tore open the shutters, “Get me a ‘Publican to lash!”

Then towards him on the breast of Taxpayer Dough,
Came Chief-of-Staff Lew, the House Liaison in tow.
And what to befuddled POTUS appeared
Was the Promise of what all Liberals hold dear!

The conspiring driver, so witty and quick,
Had come with an idea to surely do the trick!
More rapid than pirates on good winds of trade,
Jack Lew had found the secret for more Treasury raids!

I'm not saying this looks like anyone, only acts like some.

Leadership?  Plenty of butts instead …

“Now Nancy! Now Harry! Wake Biden up too!”
“On Fienstein and Boxer!” clammored The Lew.
“Grab Van Hollen and Stoyer and Allyson Schwartz!
We know how to get those ‘Publicans by the shorts!”

Sequester”, Lew cried, “is how we’ll get what we want!
Higher debt, more money, no need for any cuts!
They would never let it happen, and we won’t cut a dime!
The ‘Publicans will fold handily. They do all the time!”

Then amid all the whooping, the hollering, the yells
Someone asked, “What happens if it freezes in Hell?”
“Don’t worry about that. Our Gambit is sound.
We’ll make the ‘Publicans bad guys. Make it painful as well.”

But The Voice was persistent, an answer was needed.
What of sequestration, if the goal goes unheeded?
Of workers, fixed incomes, and services rendered,
What if the ‘Publicans didn’t surrender?

The Democrats turned on that Voice with wild looks.
Who dare throw a wrench in their Debt Ceiling hook?
Joe Taxpayer had wakened in the midst of the hoopla,
Was asking who’d suffer should The Plan prove a faux pas?

‘Twas The President’s turn to show that he cared
For those who paid taxes and relied on their share
For their services rendered, and the wages they need
For mortgages, tuition, that new Healthcare decree!

The grip of a golf club was light in Barack’s hand
Like the fate of the Middle Class throughout The Land.
He had a kind face and whispered so sweetly,
“Let us worry of that, we’re The Power Elitely!”

(From www.golf365.com)

The grip of a golf club was tight in his hand …
(From http://www.golf365.com)

He was chummy and glib, quite full of himself
So Joe Voter shrugged off the misgivings he felt.
The Democrat leaders returned to their caucus,
Plotting and planning how to best drain the coffers.

In the end their Big Gamble, it soon fell apart.
Their opponents, the ‘Publicans refused to impart
Higher taxes without spending restraint and responsibility
Towards an Economy renown for its fragile instability.

Joe Taxpayer saw this, and wondered aloud
“The Gambit was futile, so let’s kick this around.
The budget’s important!  The worst case is here!
You can’t stand on principle, and at taxpayers sneer!”

But the Democrats were nothing if not committed
To getting what they wanted without being fitted
With ceilings and limits to what they could spend
Even if it was Taxpayers who suffered in the end.

“We need them to suffer, to really feel hurt
From silly cuts in Park services to the pay for their work!
So process those furloughs!  Don’t spare them any Pain!”
The POTUS was certain their pain was his Gain.

So as Barack headed off on another vacation,
He climbed up the steps of his tax-paid ‘portation.
And we heard him exclaim as he flew out of sight
“Happy  furloughs to all!  Thanks for paying The Price!”

Obama-Claus-600

Once upon a Furlough …

Chuck Hagel

DoD Secretary Nagel, it’s “fair” to furlough Navy employees, despite the assertion that cuts can be absorbed without furloughs.

Well, it finally happened, after 33 years of Federal employment … My first Adverse Action.  A furlough, long speculated upon and hanging out there like a piece of space rock that you know is screaming – maybe more like meandering – towards you; yet you’re not quite sure if or when it might hit, or how big the mess if it does.

So it appears to be hitting, regardless of my own personal opinion (denial?) that there was no way they would allow said space junk to impact.

The story gets much uglier the further you peel the onion.

My first attempt at writing this, the day after we received our Notice of Proposed Furlough, came off like an angry rant … which it surely was.  It went in part like this:

I’m mad at all the bozos in Washington, D.C.!  All of those who would rather drive their ideological stakes into the ground and tether to those constraints the Government’s ability to function, the Country’s long-term economic health, and the tenuous condition of the Middle Class rather than dealing with the realities of the National Budget!

That goes for the Democrats as much as the Republicans, the Conservatives as much as the Liberals.  Governance requires Adults.  Unfortunately few can be found among those currently taking up space in the building they call The Capitol.  A building which frankly should have a sign draped across the front, advertising it as “The World’s Largest Day Care”!

bg-1-136694

But the biggest chunk of anger I feel is towards The White House …

That last part won’t surprise anyone who has visited here before, as I reserve a  particular animosity for those who created such an unpredictable sequestration gamble with the livelihoods of working class Americans!

But yes, I feel a little better today, thank you.  Still more than a little pissed however.

The reason is summarized somewhat by today’s title, “Once upon a Furlough …”, a twist on a phrase used by story-tellers since at least the year 1380 according to the Oxford English Dictionary.  Afterall, sequestration with all its head-scratching “cost savers” – among them the furlough of federal employees – is great big Fairy Tale.  And the story has its origins in The Oval Office during the 2011 debt-ceiling negotiations.

Sequestration Fairy

Sequestration Savings Fairy

At that time The White House was working with the Democrat’s Congressional delegation, trying to figure a way to wheedle agreement from the Republican side of The House to raise the federal debt limit.  It was then Chief-of-Staff Jack Lew (now Treasury Secretary) and White House Congressional liaison Rob Nabors who “brain stormed” The Great Sequestration Gamble of 2013.

The idea being that the sequestration would be such a painful penalty for not agreeing to a future “grand bargain” on the budget and deficit, and more importantly on what – if any – cuts could be made to said budget, and who and how much more in taxes would be paid.  This “pain” of course was aimed squarely at the Republicans, a bet on the prospects that the politics of the situation would force the Republican’s hand at a crucial moment.

Like much of what this Adminstration does, it was a poorly developed gamble that was just as shoddily executed, minus any form of Presidential Leadership, and with no fall back position other than to blame the whole mess on the Republicans in Congress.

Problem is the ploy required building sufficient political pressure to force Republicans to seek a deal.  But the Republicans dug in; refused to yield on earlier commitments to taxpayers; and held the Democrats and The White House to their promise of suitable budget cuts without more in tax revenue than Congress accepted to avoid the other contrived 2013 budget trigger – the New Year’s fiscal cliff .

Leadership???

Leadership???

The Democrats’ problem – and a continuing theme – became the need for strong Leadership from The White House.

As Scoobie Doo was so fond of saying … “Ruh Roh!”

Of course no Leadership emerged … only insistence that more tax revenue was the solution and a lot of political rallies disguised as “taking the argument to the people”.

“Ruh roh …”

Sequestration Dragon

Sequestration Dragon

And when the time came for the put-up-or-shut-up necessary to cut the heart out of the Sequestration Dragon, The White House decided to double down and really force the issue.  Though it would not be through strong leadership, circumspect vision, and the art of compromise in seeking a deal on spending and taxing.

No, no, no … Instead came the none-too-subtle message to the Republican caucus in the House of Representatives, Refuse to surrender, and the Country will suffer!

“Ruh roh …”

That’s how we ended up with the silly cancellation of White House tours, hand-wringing over Easter egg hunts, contrived air travel delays, and accusations that every unfortunate event from a bridge collapse to the bombings in Boston were the result of the sequestration.

pennyHowever, as I outlined earlier this year, the actual affect of sequestration on the 2013 fiscal budget was just 1% of everything the federal government will spend in Fiscal Year 2013.

A penny on every dollar!

And yet, here we are.

For federal employees of the U.S. Navy, the sequester furloughs are particularly infuriating because they are completely unnecessary!  Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus and other senior Navy executive leaders have made it known that the U.S. Navy could comfortably absorb the sequestration-driven budget cuts without a single civilian furlough.

Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus

Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus

The response from White House Cabinet DoD Secretary Chuck Hagel?  Yet another absence of Leadership … Insisting that the Navy furlough it’s civilian workforce in order to “be fair” to those who work for the Army and Air Force.

What?!?

Yep, that’s right  … Fairness now is the real reason for the furloughs of Navy employees as opposed to “the extraordinary and serious budget challenges facing the Department of Defense” as my deliberately misleading furlough notice states.

DoD has every indication that the Navy can absorb its share of the shared pain from this silly sequestration without affecting the incomes of its civilian employees; yet they insist the Navy reduce their employees annual earnings by 20% in order to “be fair” to those working for the Army and Air Force!

Welcome to Fairy Tale Land!

So what’s a Federal Employee to do?!?  Make them pay more of course!

imagesOne of the protections, federal employees enjoy is that of the Merit System Protection Board.  The MSPB is expecting a potential tsunami of appeals over the furloughs being forced on federal employees.  Since an appeal to the MSPB can cost the Government up to $10,000 (See “Cost of Appeals”), the Federal Government desperate for a way to stay within budget and sacrificing its employees, ends up potentially paying twice as much as it expects to save for each employee who decides to file an MSPB appeal.

For this reason every Federal Employee should consider filing an appeal regardless of how dim the prospects are for vindication!  For Navy employees in particular, Chuck Hagel has laid a very nice gift at your feet.

You can view instructions and a link to the appeal process here.  MSPB even has an e-file application to ease the confusion.  Furloughed employees have 30 days from the date-of-notice or from the first day-of-furlough, whichever is later, to file their MSPB appeals.

There … now I feel much better!

Sequester ’13: The Magic Penny Theory

pennyFive days have passed, and so far the Earth has not – as yet – careened off its axis to spin wildly off into the black void of deep space.  Commercial air travel did not turn into a nightmare overnight due to air traffic controller layoffs; the schools are still open; and I still had to go to work!

You would think that maybe – just maybe – all the Chicken Little with hair-afire warnings might have been just a little exaggerated.  Just a little …

Recently I finished reading Killing Kennedy: The End of Camelot (Bill O’Reilly and Martin Dugard), and it brought back a lot of memories.  One concept brought to mind from the aftermath of that horrific day was the Warren Commission’s development of the Magic Bullet Theory.  The bullet was believed to be the first shot that struck President John F. Kennedy; and although it was not the fatal shot, it passed through Kennedy and did major life-threatening damage to Texas Governor John Connally, who was riding in the seat in front of The President.

A second or third shot, depending on who you read, ended President Kennedy’s life.

The Magic Bullet Theory was originally greeted with much disdain by those history and conspiracy buffs, who delighted in disparaging the physics involved and the presentation made by Warren Commission Assistant Counsel Arlen Specter.

It was even the subject of a segment on Seinfeld!

Bare with me here …

Last week’s move into Sequestration automatically put into effect $85 billion in across-the-board budget cuts.  That certainly sounds like a lot of money … until you consider that the Federal Budget for Fiscal Year 2013 is $3.8 trillion!

The Congressional Budget Office, an apolitical organization that performs independent analyses of budgetary and economic issues to support the Congressional budget process, released a report stating that the effect of sequestration cuts for Fiscal Year 2013 will be $42 billion, not even half of the full measure of $85 billion estimated as sequester-related cuts!

Of course that assumes that the sequestration will last throughout the remainder of the fiscal year.  I wouldn’t bet the House … or the Senate … on that proposition.

In fact another trigger date – a Continuing Resolution – is scheduled to hit by the end of March.  Lack of an agreement then could shut down ALL of Government, minus the traditional exemption provided the Department of Defense.  Will this opportunity also pass without a Presidential Vulcan mind-meld (Sorry, couldn’t resist.) on a grander solution?

But it’s the math involved with this current sequestration that is irrefutable.  $42 billion equates to $0.01 ($42 billion/$3.8 trillion = $0.01) for every dollar in the FY13 federal budget.  One stinkin’ cent … an Abe, and not the more lovable $5 Lincoln … One penny on every dollar!

But that single cent is one Magic Penny!

The Magic Penny set off the wailing of the sirens warning of National misfortune and personal misery from The White House and Democrats.  There have been almost daily pronouncements of Sequester Doom & Gloom in local newspapers, on national broadcasts, and on-line media.  The Sequester, a mechanism that was actually resurrected by The White House and proposed by those very Democrats in debt ceiling negotiations, would have profound effects on the country and its citizens at the hands of those heartless Republicans in Congress.

Now all of us, particularly those outside the upper reaches of the top tax brackets, have been under constant financial pressure for the past 5-6 years.  Most recently, you lost the 2% reduction in payroll tax from 2010.  And while some will argue the expiration of tax relief is not a tax increase per se.  Fact is you are paying more in taxes; bringing home less money.  Call it what you will, your household is doing with less income.

Even if your wages have held fairly stable over this period, certainly your Costs of Living continue to rise.

Have those increases in taxes and rise in daily costs been more than a penny on your dollar?  Most probably … Were you able to adjust; do without some things; change plans; push out major expenditures waiting for better financial times?  Probably …  Has your loss of buying power been an adverse development for your household budget?  Most likely …

But you made the adjustments. You do what you can.  You bag the rest, and hope for better times.

Sequestration is perhaps the WORST strategy for fiscal negotiations ever to be uttered by any White House Administration.  And certainly, both sides should get back to work on a solution that will benefit the long-term economic health of the Nation.  But for President Obama and the Democrats to expect capitulation by the Republican Congress on their principles of fiscal responsibility over cuts equal to a penny on the dollar in the Federal budget is simply silly.

Yet Washington Democrats – in particular The White House and President Obama – will have you thinking the sky will be falling all over that Magic Penny!  Some of the pronouncements coming out of The White House have been downright hyperbolic.

National air travel would be disrupted; teachers were being furloughed, The President said (That is until the press corps challenged The White House to give one example – just one – of a school district that had issued pink slips.  They couldn’t!);  National Parks would be closing; dangerous food situations would increase, caused by the loss of food inspectors; coastal inhabitants would be at the mercy of Superstorms because weather forecasting will be unaffordable; an entire aircraft carrier group held back from active front-line service; grannies kicked to the curb; the Nation would totter on the brink of financial ruin; communities would no longer be able to protect its citizens …

All over one penny on the dollar of a ridiculously bloated Federal Budget!

That, my friends, is what Seinfeld would call One Magic Loogie!

Sequestration: The President’s ugly Child

obamaHow many people realize sequestration, which The White House continually warns will be a “disaster” for the country and its citizens from Arizona to Connecticut, was actually The White House’s brain-child???

Don’t listen to the hype … or the lies.  The sky, if it falls, will not be the sole responsibility of Congress.  Heck, it wasn’t even their idea.

The Public is a pawn in this chess game.  The political pressure being applied by The White House, in the form of Dire Economic Impacts on individual states and even the victims of Superstorm Sandy, is intended to force Congress (i.e. Republicans) – by portraying them as the troublemakers – to cave in so they can pass to the American people an even bigger financial federal budget burden without cutting a single one of the Democrats’ Sacred Cows.

Sequestration was the gamble suggested by then White House Chief-of-Staff Jack Lew (Secretary of the Treasury nominee) and White House Congressional liaison Rob Nabors.  It was endorsed by President Obama before being presented to the Senate Finance Committee, and proposed as a negotiating strategy to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev) during the 2011 negotiations to raise the National Debt Ceiling.

Certainly House Republicans accepted the sequestration as part of those negotiations, but it wasn’t their idea; it wasn’t their gamble.

It was the President’s idea of “leadership” in difficult political times.  Push it off; deal with it later.  Maybe, just maybe it will go away on its own.

Keep that in mind as you continue to hear about how Sequestration will damage your benefits; your income; your local economy!

Remember it when The President shows up on C-Span or the nightly news speaking about the dangers of sequestration and surrounding himself with Emergency Responders, teachers, healthcare workers, and seniors warning about all the damage the sequestration cuts will entail.

Sequestration:  The President’s ugly child!

The Art of Fiscal Cliff-Diving

Too far out front to be from D.C.

Way too bold to be from D.C.

There was a point in my life – a long, long time ago in a land far away – that I waited not-so-patiently for late Saturday afternoons when I could hijack the family TV (NEVER during a Notre Dame football game!) and flip on ABC’s Wide World of Sports.  WWS was a hodgepodge of traditional, niche market sports such as the Penn Relays, amateur boxing, international soccer (Remember now, this was the 1960s.) and some really arcane competitions like barrel-jumping.  (Who doesn’t enjoy a good barrel-jump crash?!?)  and the iconic cliff diving competitions from La Quebrada, near Acapulco, Mexico.

Cliff diving – it appears – is making a big comeback!

No, this version does not include majestic vistas of bright sunlight glistening off blue water as a backdrop to a group of whacked-out daredevils perched on a rock sitting perilously close to a huge cliff that looks a mile high even on black & white TV (the 1960s … Remember?).

No, this fiscal cliff diving version just includes the whacked-out daredevils.

No Speedos, please

No Speedos, please

Now admit it … Wouldn’t you just LOVE this fiscal nonsense as REAL cliff-diving?!?  Are you a bit twisted, just enough that you would enjoy this political pissing contest just a little bit, if it included the possibility that John Boehner, President Obama, Harry Reid and – please, please, please – Nancy Pelosi could possibly … just maybe … go SPLAT at the bottom of the shallow end???

Hmmm … But that would leave Joe Biden in charge.

Well, this is hypothetical; so let’s push that thought way, way back into that Dark Space we reserve for the Zombie Apocalypse, IRS audits, and Nicki Minaj.

Where was I?!?  Oh yeah … cliff diving …

Full-length burka only

Full-length burka only

Anyways, cliff diving competitions use of method of score-keeping that emphasizes style, creativity, and a difficulty factor in lieu of how many jumps you make before going SPLAT or the number of broken bones should you survive.

That’s the way I would score it.  But remember, I also like a good barrel-jumping crash!

Now, regardless of where you stand on the impending Thelma & Louise act (Obama as Susan Sarandon’s Louise, of course) currently being played out on the cliffs overlooking Washington, D.C., it’s best to be prepared when it’s your turn to Follow-the-Leaders over a perfectly good cliff.

Frankly, I really could not care less about the Fiscal Cliff.

My long, long-standing federal employment never required me to pay into or rely upon Social Security (Thank God!).  So not only did I NOT benefit from the Bush tax cuts, which were applied to Social Security taxes, I will not suffer from their expiration either.  And maybe … just maybe … we actually NEED this to happen.  Afterall, 51% of the Electorate did not give a rat fart about the Economy during the November election, so why worry about it now?!?

Yes, in that regard I am a bit selfish.

The reality is that BOTH parties would probably benefit from a hand-holding cliff dive, no doubt screaming “WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!” all the way to the bottom.  President Obama could then brag that he faced down the terrible Republicans, who realize that raising taxes in a bad Economy is a really stupid idea.  (Apparently so does The President, since he couples his demand for increased marginal tax rates on the wealthy with a $50 billion stimulus package.)

The Republicans – on the other hand – can claim they never gave in to the anti-economy, income-redistributing Democrats.  (Is there really any other explanation for taking from the rich with one hand and pushing out a stimulus with the other when the “real issue” is supposed to be deficit reduction?)  All told, The President’s proposal amounts to a $1.6 TRILLION in new taxes and spending, and $400 billion – or 2.5% of the total $16 TRILLION of National Debt – in deficit reductions!

As one critique described it, “Four hundred billion in spending cuts is like forgoing the monogrammed towels in the 16th bathroom of a 52,000 square foot house.”

So, if you too are willing to embrace the possibility of becoming a mushy piece of fiscal fish food, now is the time to consider your approach to Taking the Dive.  Will you scream like a teenage girl on the Tower of Terror?  Will you stick out a stiff upper lip and leap with resignation and a modicum of dignity?  Or will you dive with flair and style, performing a triple flip with a full twist while singing Madonna‘s classic, “Material Girl (Guy)” all the way to the bottom?

And if you’re wondering how it all came to this, to ridiculous deficits, to abject failure in Leadership for addressing the excess in deficit spending, to the notion that raising taxes on 2% of the population – as if forgoing the monogrammed towels – is a “solution”, then simply check out the story this week coming out of Detroit’s City Council.

Hey, $200 million here, $200 million there … What’s the BIG DEAL, right?  At least we now know why Detroit voted Obama … To bring home “the bacon”!

Tocqueville, South of France (1992)

Tocqueville, South of France (1992)

As historic French cliff-diver, Alexis de Tocqueville is rumored to have said,

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government.  It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself free stuff * out of the public treasury.”

(* OK … He actually said, “… largesse …”. )

With that in mind, allow me to recommend the following in cliff-diving hints and suggestions:

1.  Never hit the water head-first, as dives above 85 feet can result in concussion.  (How high exactly is a $16 trillion dollar stack of Benjamins?!?)

B.  Select a spot along the cliff with an unobstructed view all the way down to almost certain Death.

4.  No Speedos for men.  Women?  Topless, of course.

iii)  Poise precariously on the smooth rock of Economic Sanity; time the incoming wave of debris from the Eurozone; and push away violently from this amazing fustercluck.

p.  Immediately assume the simple pike position; feet wisely pointed down; and extend the middle digits on both hands as you sing the following verse from Sarah Johns’ The One in the Middle:

And now I’m giving you the one in the middle,

The one that’s a little bit longer.

And I have another one on the other hand,

So I can say it even stronger. 

Joe Rooney vs. 1% Allyson

Joe Rooney – PA 13th Congressional District

It’s almost over, really it is!  And it’s taking everything I have to write just one more Election 2012 post.  Not sure I can make to the end, but the importance of this election mandates not only a change in The White House.  This election calls for wholesale changes at the Congressional and Senate levels as well!

I have given you my reasonings for both Mitt Romney and Tom Smith for the Pennsylvania Senate race against Bob “Senator Zero” Casey.  Now let’s take a look at the race in the Pennsylvania 13th Congressional District.

I met Joe Rooney in February of this year as he made the rounds of the GOP establishment trying to drum up support for his primary candidacy.  I was immediately impressed by Joe’s honest, straight-at-you demeanor and his grasp of the important issues facing us.  My reaction to his visit and remarks were that he was head-and-shoulders over the entire field that vied for the same primary endorsement in 2010.  There were 5 …. or 6 candidates back then; and none of them seemed strong enough to shine their lights through a brown bag, let alone in competition with Allyson Schwartz.  (Joe Rooney for Congress website)

But all that changed once Joe began laying out his background, experiences (including service to this Country as a Marine pilot flying F-4 Phantoms and F/A-18 Hornets, the mainstay of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps air fleets), and goals for Congressional service and the interests of PA 13th constituencies.  Like many well-rounded military officers, Joe Rooney had his political game wound tightly and focused.  He has confidence in his understanding of what the Country needs to be successful domestically, internationally, and Economically.

Joe Rooney is an American Optimist.

 “The American economy can be the engine that drives the rest of the world out of the economic hole that currently exists.”   –  Joe Rooney

His message resonates with Everyone, whether you are hard-working mother or father trying to get your take-home pay to at least wave at your Budget, if not actually try to meet it!  It resonates with retirees on fixed incomes, with students who will be out looking for Jobs in the years to come.  Joe’s message will especially resonate with those who have been victimized by an Economy mired in 8% Unemployment, 12.3 million people out of Jobs, mounting debt both National (up from $10 trillion to $16 trillion during the Obama/Schwartz years) and personal.

One thing about Joe Rooney really impressed me.  He was ready to take on all comers to earn the right to face Allyson Schwartz in this crucial election.

Allyson Schwartz swings a big stick when it comes to Democratic competition

Allyson Schwartz of the 1% had an entirely different approach to entertaining an opposing voice in the Democrat primaries.  She very coldly forced one Occupy Wall Street candidate, Nate Kleinman out of the primary race through dirty tricks (making a staff-less Kleinman sit with a team of Schwartz operatives to verify each individual nominating petition) and through financial intimidation (filing lawsuits intended to make Kleinman responsible for the legal costs incurred by the Schwartz campaign).

Not exactly the kind of free and open Democracy we are used to, eh?  Why, it was downright Nixonian!  Yes, Richard Millhouse would be very, very proud!

But that’s what happens when The Queen rules the roost.

Schwartz has benefitted mightily from a wide array of political benefactors in the form of large dollar corporate donors and Political Action Committees.

Schwartz’s funding for the 2011-12 election cycle came primarily from large individual contributors (57%) and Political Action Committees (38%), only 3% came from small individual contributors.  Her biggest corporate and association sponsors include Comcast Corp, Teva Pharmaceuticals, and the American Association of  Orthopaedic Surgeons.  Her top industry support comes from lawyers, health professionals, pharmaceutical and insurance companies.

Not exactly residents of the 99% …

Now no one really knows how the headline political confrontation will end up Tuesday – or whenever the last Electoral College votes get cast; but certainly it’s easy to see which candidate in the PA’s 13th Congressional District is more like you and me!

It’s Joe Rooney for Congress!

Has anyone seen Bob Casey?!?

The only place to find Senator Bob Casey

In Pennsylvania, we’re deeply concerned.  It seems that one of our U.S. Senators is MISSING!!

At first, no one was very concerned.  After all, Senator Bob Casey wasn’t exactly a Public Presence anywhere in Washington, D.C. – let alone in Pennsylvania – for almost the entire SIX YEARS that he’s been Pennsylvania’s lesser light in U.S. Senate.

Go ahead and take a minute … Think back as far as you can over the past six years and ask yourself, how many times you have heard of Bob Casey accomplishing anything for Pennsylvania or anything for the country?  How many times have you heard Senator Zero speak out to you – as Pennsylvanians or as Americans – on the important issues of the day?  What has he DONE during his SIX YEARS in the U.S. Senate?

For comparison look to the public profile of Pennsylvania’s other U.S. Senator, Pat Toomey.  If you pay attention, you will see him cable and TV news outlets, advocating for those programs and actions he believes would improve the country. Whether you agree or disagree with Toomey is immaterial; he is out there putting his reputation and political future on the line!

Senator Zero – The REAL Bob Casey

Bob Casey?  His biggest contribution as a U.S. Senator has been as a Silent Supporter of President Obama’s policies and programs, including Obamacare, the Economy with its 12.3 million people out of work, the National Debt which is up from $10 Trillion to $16 Trillion, and the decisions to “distance” the U.S. from Israel.

Then ask yourself, Where has Senator Casey been on the important social issues of the day?  Issues like women’s choice or gay marriage??  As a devout Catholic, Bob Casey believes Rowe v. Wade should be overturned and is opposed to gay marriage.  Yet a review of Bob Casey’s website shows NOTHING on EITHER subject.

You want to know why you won’t find them?  You won’t find them because Bob Casey knows many Democrats, those who will vote this Tuesday for President Obama, would not normally vote for an anti-Choice, anti-gay marriage candidate!

Bob Casey would rather stay SILENT than take a public stand that would potentially damage his Political Prospects!

.

Tom Smith … Facing the Issues. Bob Casey? Not so much …

Tom Smith is a self-made man, who mortgaged everything he had to create Jobs and Opportunity in Pennsylvania.  He managed several successful Businesses through tough economies in highly regulated industries.

As a fiscal conservative, he wants to simplify the tax code and to reign in out-of-control Federal spending.  As a successful creator of energy jobs in Pennsylvania, Mr. Smith is in favor of developing American energy opportunities to provide jobs for Americans.

Visit the Tom Smith for Senate website to learn more or to make a donation to the American Red Cross for those affected by Hurricane Sandy.  You can also check out Tom Smith’s DETAILED plans for the Country on his issues website.

You may not agree with Tom Smith on every issue; but at least he’s not shy about telling you where he stands!

Then, when you leave the Smith website, take a wander over to Bob Casey’s website for the three-sentence blurbs he provides on the important issues in this country.

Just don’t expect anything on Women’s Rights or LGBT issues.  They aren’t there, and for good reason.

Senator Zero – The REAL Bob Casey

Now ask yourself, is this the kind of Senator Pennsylvania needs?

Half correct on 47% still tells the ugly truth

It’s imperative that write something today, just to break the lazy hangover I have enjoyed all week following the frantic, emotional stress of Mike Jr.’s wedding last week.  I promise to follow-up with details and pictures of the great time we had; but that would require sorting through 8000 photos (my estimate) to pick those that would best tell the story of our Lost Weekend in Williamsport.  (Trust me.  That title connotes a very favorable experience within the crazy motions and emotions of a son’s (or daughter’s) wedding.  More on that later … )

I could write about my recent lawn treatment.  But that would require an uptick in my Lawn Geek Level that I’m not willing to invest in this Sunday morning.

And so I’ll turn to more recent news, and one of my favorite pastimes … Cranky Political Observations.

First, let’s look at Mitt Romney and some of the absolutely ridiculous claims President Obama‘s campaign and supporters continue to make when it comes to Romney’s wealth and tax history.  The important thing to keep in mind is every minute spent defending Romney against such nonsenseical attacks is time diverted from hammering away at the sorry state of The Obama Economy.

Afterall, with almost four years of President Obama’s stewardship, the Economy – or lack thereof – is rightfully his to won!  (You only get to blame your predecessor for so long, and certainly not through a full term in The Oval Office when – as President – you have shown no Leadership whatsoever on Issues of Economic Recovery.)

Now Mitt admittedly caused himself a self-inflicted wound with his meanderings on the “47% of Americans who do not pay taxes”.  Not paying taxes does not automatically make you a slouch.  There are plenty of people, rightfully classified as disabled, aging veterans, etc. who fall into that very broad 47% category.  Mitt might have bitten off more than he could chew; but let’s be honest, he was at least 53% correct about that 47%.

Regardless of the dangers associated with judging-by-percentages into which Romney stumbled, we ALL KNOW what he meant.  Within that group is a hardcore class of people who have not the slightest interest or desire to break their dependence on the REDISTRIBUTION of other people’s hard work and income!  And within that sub-class is another that not only shows little-to-no interest in self-sufficiency, they REVEL in their status as Economic Sponges!

Even Bill Clinton recognized the need to fix this when he joined with Congressional Republicans to pass the Welfare Reform Act of 1996.  So this is not news to even the most hardened of Liberals.

Sunday’s Philadelphia Inquirer attempts to make the claim that REDISTRIBUTION of income is not a “bad word”.  They try to soft sell this idea by stating that REDISTRIBUTION is used for small business loans, Pell Grants for college education, veterans’ benefits, etc.  Of course they also throw in food stamps and welfare, but almost as an afterthought.

Intelligent, reality-educated people can distinguish between good uses for REDISTRIBUTED INCOME and other programs that simply rely on the toils and work ethic of the majority of Americans to fund the never-ending cycle of handouts to perpetual non-contributors.  And that’s what MOST objectors to the Welfare Mentality think of when they hear INCOME REDISTRIBUTION … not Pell Grants, small business loans and taking care of aging veterans.

Liberals – and Obama supporters – KNOW this; but it suits their intentions in this 2012 election year to make it about the whole of benefits that come from INCOME REDISTRIBUTION, not the perfectly acceptable Social Contract that expects those who work at good jobs to provide TEMPORARY assistance to those who need a hand up in tough times or even those with legitimate long-term disabilities and maladies that prevent even part-time employment.

Do not allow them to suggest that there is no difference between Good Income Redistribution and the ugly realities of the Welfare State of Mind!

As for Mitt’s tax records, one observation is enough to put that entire subject into perspective.  If President Obama’s proxies, like the half-baked Liar from Arizona – Harry Reid, are so desperate as to criticize Romney for tax rates and wealth shelters that were perfectly acceptable for Al Gore (2000) and John “Heinz 57” Kerry (2004), then you must recognize them for what those attacks are … Deperate attempts to distract you, me, and all voters from the Unemployed Economy.

So the more we spend talking about this, the less time we have to address what the REAL PROBLEM is in 2012, the stagnant National Economy and the broken stewardship of a Leadership-challenged President!  Those of us longing for REAL Economic Leadership need to ignore these straw men and do what we can to refocus on the horrible state of President Obama’s own Economic Malaise!

.

Tom Smith for U.S. Senate

Will Pennsylvania U.S. Senate candidate Tom Smith ever get the chance to smoke out do-nothing U.S. Senator Bob Casey in his race to challenge a man who has nothing on his resume’ other than a famous father?

You can’t find anything on Bob Casey’s re-election campaign without a brace of media savvy internet bloodhounds.  Casey refuses to come out into the open, like any politician with little track record, and a recognizable name.  (How many voters still think they are voting for his father?)  Casey continues to hide behind Barack Obama, even while doing anything to avoid endorsing him too much, too often.

He and Congressional REP Allyson Schwartz (See Joe Rooney) are probably sharing the same remote Pocono cabin; waiting for election day to come so they can sneak into their neighborhood polling location and hope for the best … meaning of course, voters who don’t bother looking at how their support of a poor Presidential leader has contributed to the Economic Stagnation we still face after four years of Democrat control over the U.S. Government.

For that reason alone, Bob Casey, Jr. would gladly spend this election cycle hiding under his bed!  Add to that his opposition to the Liberal Litmus that is Abortion, his obvious implied stance against Gay Marriage,  (Go ahead and try to find any reference to Gay Marriage on his official campaign or Senate websites!) and you have a Liberal Democrat’s biggest nightmare … Supporting a family values candidate that disdains everything a Good Liberal loves all because he has a “D” connected to his father’s name!

The REAL Bob Casey

Fortunately for Pennsylvania Liberals, Casey’s middle name is not “Fracking”!

Tom Smith stands for Ending Out-of-Control Federal Spending, Reducing Job-Killing Regulations, Promoting American Energy to Provide American Jobs, Simplified Tax Codes, and reasonable solutions to Healthcare and the long-term viability of Social Security and Medicare.  These are the issues of the day that need discussing.  But Bob Casey will not be found this election season discussing anything you care about in the presence of Tom Smith, and that’s a shame for all Pennsylvania voters!

.

Finally, if you get the chance, read Trudy Rubin’s column on The Real Muslim Movie Outrage in the Philadelphia Inquirer’s Opinion page this Sunday.  I rarely agree with Ms. Rubin’s view on domestic politics, but her concise, honest review of the radical Islamic elements working to inflate Muslim tensions is enlightening.

When the crazies kill, why sanction the legal and responsible?

Here we go again …

Another crazy gets hold of an arsenal of weapons; breaks almost every law in the books; and shoots scores of innocents.  And the result is predictable … a groundswell of opinion that never wavers … PASS LAWS TO RESTRICT GUN OWNERSHIP!

The problem with that sentiment is that third word … “LAWS”.  Because “laws” only apply to those inclined to obey them in the first place!  

It’s one thing if our elected leaders had the backbone to take on such an unpopular position (unpopular that is to most people who do not live in large, liberal-run cities) and accept the political consequences.  But that’s rarely ever the case, when politics and power are of greater value.  And that’s exactly the sentiment that was expressed by Democrat stalwart Senator (CA) Dianne Feinstein, who stated, although a sane discussion on gun control and a ban on military-type assault rifles was important, an election year was not the time to address it. 

Huh?!?  Wouldn’t that be the PERFECT time to address the issue?!?

Apparently the Democrats see a discussion of gun control to be a political loser in a year when President Obama is fighting for re-election in what is expected to be a close election.  For these Democrats, the subject of limiting gun violence by restricting access to guns for everyone is trumped by White House aspirations.  It says much about where the issue really sits with the political animals of the Democratic Party.  So, if they refuse to have this discussion now, why should they be taken seriously when they finally get around to it? 

In that same vein, we are still waiting for The President to get around to his 2008 campaign promises on gun control.  Instead, President Obama has signed bills allowing guns in national parks and even on Amtrak!   He has steadfastly refused to seek reinstatement of the Assault Weapons Ban.  And maybe that’s the real reason Democrats – like Senator Feinstein – do not wish to bring it up now!

But in truth, even if we did have this conversation today, it would accomplish NOTHING for keeping guns of all shapes, sizes, and magazine capacities from the criminals and the crazies. 

If it were that easy, we wouldn’t have had Aurora … or Columbine … or Howard Unruh … or the University of Texas clock tower … or Virginia Tech …

That’s the REAL problem … the criminals and the crazies.  You have no right to ask law-biding citizens to give up access to responsible gun ownership if you have no prospects for denying similar weapons to the criminals and the crazies.  And it’s mind-boggling that anyone would propose such a ban in an age where our own Federal Government openly distributed guns to the most dangerous criminals currently on the continent.  They must solve the problem of keeping automatic assault weapons from the drug runners, the gangs, and criminally insane before asking John Q. Citizen to even consider doing the same.   

I ain’t holding my breath on the former, but fully expect continued efforts to do the latter.

For another reason entirely, I laugh when gun opponents run up the flag of the Founding Fathers to claim that they had no intention for gun ownership to exist outside what was needed for the purposes of organized state militias.  That may well have been their original intent, just like it was to restrict the voting rights of women or to count African slaves as 3/5 of a person.  In reality, the concept of militia had little-to-nothing to do historically with the development of a gun culture in the United States.

Every household in 18th century America REQUIRED the possession of a firearm.  This was not a legal requirement; it was a requirement for survival.  For if you lived anywhere other than the relative safety of early American cities, a gun was as important as food in surviving the dangers and hostilities of the unsettled frontier. 

Whether it was dealing with the growing hostility of a native population or using the point-of-a-gun to discourage foreign intervention and push American civilization West across the North American continent, the National Government fostered the concept of private gun ownership – far removed from the concept of militia service – among its citizens.  Huge tracts of territory were settled and controlled; colonial forces from Spain, Britain, and France were pushed out; and the Wild West was colonized, then civilized with the help of armed citizens that NEVER once stepped foot into a militia formation.

It renders the concept of “militia” a convenient interpretation of a badly worded phrase in the Bill of Rights.  So for better or worse – depending on your point-of-view – America grew and flourished as the result of a gun culture that was accepted by a Government led directly by those same Founding Fathers.  The same ones who supposedly never intended private gun ownership outside of a quasi-military apparatus. 

The irony seems lost on those who want to blame the carnage on law-biding citizens and their long-held rights.