SamSaid!

George Bush was not a very popular President — at least as judged by most of the mass media. He suffered harsh criticism and even ridicule by some of the evening TV spokesmen. But he didn’t lash out at the media people or political spokesmen. He was not a whiner or an attack dog. He kept his cool with a statesman-like demeanor and a thick hide.
Not so with our current President who has a thin skin and a big ego. Obama thinks the role of the media is to praise his rhetoric and support his programs. To him, it is unthinkable for the media to question his programs, motives, or leadership.
Then along comes Fox news with a different take on his administration. They (Fox)have the temerity to question his leadership and his programs. He does not like to be labeled as Barack the Big spender, nor does he enjoy being accused of ducking tough decisions. His thin skin is showing puncture wounds that clever phrases can’t hide or disguise. So now he has declared war on Fox news.
I enjoy Fox — it is refreshing and it tackles areas that the Big Media passes over. Personally, I think Obama will rue the day he attacked the press — when some of the other guys will turn on him.
Can’t buy your way out of this one, and people are beginning to see thru the fancy words.
Score : Fox 3 Obama 1

For the past 5-6 decades the print media in the USA included prominent daily newspapers from virtually every major city in the country. The Wall Street Journal had only a modest circulation among the New York City financial types and didn’t come close to circulation comparisons with the big City papers. Last week it was announced that the WSJ had passed USA Today and now has the widest and largest circulation of any newspaper in the country. I have subscribed to the WSJ for many years but I had no idea that it had grown that much. For many years I have been convinced that the editorial pages of the WSJ are the best in the US and it is gratifying to see that so many folks now have access the WSJ editorialists. In days of Obamanomics we need quality input to matters of National and International import. Personally, my breakfast consists of coffee, the WSJ and food — in that order. Who would ever have imagined that the WSJ could achieve such nationwide prominence without either a Comics section or a Sports page.
No kidding — it’s true. Maybe there is still hope to avoid the slide to socialism.

It is World series time and thoughts can move from Obama’s grandiose spending programs to more mundane subjects like Afghanistan and our foreign policy (if we have one). I am reminded of a couple of sayings that would seem appropriate. In the world of baseball a particularly inept participant is one who doesn’t know the difference between his elbow and first base. In the world of politics, those in the slow lane just don’t seem to know the difference between a particular part of their anatomy from a hole in the ground ( borrowed from a barnyard expression). This seems to fit Omama and his “brain trust” as they spend week after week in trying to decide what to do in the Middle East. Is it brain picking or pooling ignorance?? I’ll try ot be kind. I don’t think they have the foggiest notion of what to do, and they are in the soup way over their heads. As citizens, I think we have every right to be very concerned about our country under his leadership. The only enemies he sees on the horizon are Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. Pretty sad commentary. Will $250 be enough to pay for his lack of leadership? Not in this household.

Ten -twenty years ago, Academicians were all concerned about the approach of some kind of mini-ice age  –  the prospect of global cooling.  And these theorems were strongly supported by some of the more pre-eminent scientists in the US.  Of course it all fizzled and then among came Al Gore. Now all the rage is global warming.   And you can just see Obama licking his chops at the prospect of  Cap and Trade to satisfy his Green buddies.  Congress will be starting the legislative (spending) process soon. In this day and age, what is another $100 Billion or so?

But aren’t we getting the cart before the horse. It seems to me that there are two separate threshold questions to be answered before we plunge off the deep end of the pool.  First, is the planet really warming, and if so, at what rate? Second, is the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere man induced or not?  If we can get consensus on Q 1 then we can proceed to Q2. But until we can sensibly agree on Q1, why should we contemplete major expenditures on Q 2? With a shaky economy, we don’t need another  big wild goose chase.  Is any big CO2  expenditure really prudent right now?  And what if we launch a huge spending program and the rest of the world says Ho-hum and good luck.

I do not have much confidence in our Prez when it come to spending $Trillions.

Gary Kasparov is not a household name in the USAas it is in much of the rest of the civilized world. He is a Russian intellectual author and the primary voice of the dissidents who oppose the policies and leadership of Vladimir Putin.  He is a contributor to the Wall St. Journal. His international fame rests on his having been  the International chess champion for several years.  But for his celebrity status he might well be languishing in a Russian Gulag somewhere in Siberia.

Here is his take on Mr.Obama.

” Like many Russians, I was encouraged by Mr Obama’s inspirational speech in Moscow last July, but he must know there is more to statesmanship than printing money making speeches.  Inflated rhetoric like inflated currency, can lead to disaster. The goodwill bubble Mt Obama is creating will burst unless there are real results soon.”   10/19/09

Twenty years ago, MargaretThatcher, the British Iron Lady offered some cogent comments about “consensus”.  She said, ” To me consensus seems to be to process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies in search of something in which no one believes but to which no one objects  —   the process of avoiding the very issues that have to be solved merely because you cannot get agreement on the way ahead. What great cause would have been fought and won under the banner, ” I stand for consensus”?

Maybe we would only have had 9 colonies instead of 13.

During the next two weeks, Obama and his brain trust will be trying  to develop an Afghan strategy for the war which seems to be going badly or at least not good enough. It doesn’t seem all that long ago when the might Red Army of the USSR packed up their gear and walked away from Afghanistan. Their military defeat in large measure can be attributed to the Stinger missiles supplied to the Afghans by the USA. The Afghan defeat in part led to the disintegration of the old USSR.  Now we face the same dilemna as did the Russians. Do we get out or don’t we? Our military leaders want 40,000 more troops . Obama who is anything but a hawk is reluctant to make such a commitment in “his” war. So,  now we seek a”consensus”. Do we make a major commitment or don’t we?? One thing is for sure  –  the basis of whatever decision is reached will be based on the consensus.  It will not be an Obama decision. The soaring rhetoric has produced nothing and an inexperienced  Obama is in over his head. In short, he doesn’t know what to do. Keep looking for the word “we”. Brain picking is OK, But Harry Truman had it right, “The buck stops here”.

Back in my growing up days, a favorite saying was “robbing Peter to Pay Paul”. No harm done, no winner and no loser.  Well, sort of. But now that old saying hs been converted into a political philosophy.  The Dems now champion the cause of  “share the wealth” and “Re-distribution of income” . They make it sound like a fair policy.  On the road to Socialism, what could be more fair, and certainly, Paul will not complain as long as Peter is paying the bills and providing the cash.   How close to outright theft is this nifty little slight of hand?  Does the graduated income tax follow the theme??  Sounds like it to me!!

Our country faces some big complicated problems and there is no shortage of gurus and self styled experts offering  advice on all sorts of issues day after day. And there are all kinds of periodicals citing their own expertise on everything. You name it  –  foreign policy,  taxes, medical reform, same sex marriage, sex scandals, Social Security, baseball,  trillion dollar deficits, political appointments, judges, etc etc etc. But for most of us, the problem is always who to believe?  Is it fact or another con job?

Some years back, a canny old timer gave me some good advice  —  advice that I have followed faithfully. He said “The best OP/ED pages in the country are in the Wall Street Journal. When in doubt, follow the WSJ”.  Pretty good advice  –  they don’t go wrong very many times. We have survived Slick Wille and now live with BamBam and company. Any time we want to fix the educational system, just make the WSJ required reading. Maybe not for Fashion or Sports but everything else. Especially in election years.

The watchword of the Obama campaign was “Change”  –  BIG change.  And his efforts are now being put to the test. “Change ” is a good word. It conveys a positive connotation. ” I am for change, change is good, so vote for me”. And he rode the wave of change all the way to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Gotta hand it to him.

Fundamentally, there are two ways of achieving major political (governmental) change. The quick route is by force. Overthrow the status quo  –  seize power by force –  suppress or suspend individual freedoms  –  enhance the role of big government  –  limit the power of the press  –  create the police state.

THAT’S CALLED REVOLUTION

The second way to implement major change  is more gradual and more peaceful but just as devastating.  Control Congress and the court system.  Enlist a friendly media. Downplay individual freedoms and rights. Stress the “common good”. Dominate the TV and written media sources.  Attack the successful people and criticize wealth. Apologize for our competitive successes. Share the wealth and redistribute income.

THAT’S CALLED TAXATION

Sound familiar?  We are witnessing a major try at Choice # 2