Justice at the Justice Department?

Attorney General Holder has issues. We all know this. The time has come for some accountability. AG Holder should not of been confirmed due to his tax issues, whihc brough into question his character. His character has been in question alot since then.

Now the lastest, in a serious rebuke, the top ranking career attorney in the department, accuses the Office of Professional Responsibiltiy with seriousd wrong doing in the investigation of the Bush Era torture memos. Even though he personally disagrees with the lawyers decisions in support of torture, it is a very comlicated legal matter involveing a complex area of unsettled law. He took issue with the departure of standard investigative procedures in favor of plitically biased investigating.

The OPR is led by Ms. Brown, who just happens to have been nominated for a federal judgeship by the president. This is the same office that is "currently" investigating the dropped Voter Intimadation charges in Philadelphia. The ethics of the Justice department's OPR are in question, as is the leadership under Ms. Brown. The smell of political back scratching is overwhelming and leads right to the White House.

Health Care TV

With the Health Care Summit coming to television today a few comments to ponder.
Let start with the President, he has a compromise plan he crafted with the Democratic Congressional Leadership at the White House and a plan to pass the bill through a back door budgetary manuever called reconcilation which only needs 51 votes to pass to avoid the Republican filibuster. Whether he can get 51 democrats to vote for it is a different issue.

Republicans are in a different seat. Being labeled the party of no has not stuck because it is not correct. The party of sell outs would be a better description. Is there a back bone in the Republican Party? Stand Up and scream for your ideals. Less Government, Less Taxes, Less Regulation.

Democrats are the ones who the President has screwed. To vote for the plan will mean no reelection for a lot of people. In Nevada watching the President shove Health care down the throats of people who wanted to talk about jobs and the economy, and instead got a "lesson" with a good finger wag, on the need to pass Health Care Reform at any cost. Say Good Bye Mr. Reid.

The President had the largest majority in Congress I have ever seen and failed to enact Health care Reform. His response is to blame the Republicans. How about someone taking some responsibility?
With all this the President calls for a summit on Health Care. Announces it on television without informing Republicans about it. Then dictated when, where, how it will occur. What purpose is to be served if the deal is already done. Oh yeah, I forgot, it makes great television and the president is running for relection you know.

Federal Job Fair Going Strong Despite the Economy

If we want to control our own future something needs to be done. The situation in Washington is out of control. While the country is tightening their collective belts and hunkering down, the federal government has gone on a spending spree for a lot of stuff not really needed. In this blog it was pointed out that USA Today has shown in 18 months jobs at TSA earning $170,000 or more a year had gone from 1 to 1690. Since the economy is so bad and they are struggling so much but doing such an outstanding job (required performance rating for the big bucks), average bonus for these folks, $14,831. Did I hear the President complain about Bonuses? The President has credibility gap and it is widening.
Investigative giant, USA Today has noted that in the Defense Department, during the same 18 month period, the number of civilian employees earning more then $150,00 has gone from 1,868 to 10,100.
The President has proposed a modest 2% pay raise this year. The raise is treated as an inherent right. There should be no raise this year. That would save $120,000,000,000 (120 Billion Dollars). Chevy's Mexican Restaurant's cut their salaries by 10% across the board to make the company survive this downturn. Could you imagine the savings of a 10% reduction in salaries across the government...it has a lot of zeros in it. ($600 Billion a year).
One last item from USA Today
When I was growing up the federal worker was under paid but their generous benefit package made up the difference. Today the numbers tell a different story, the average compensation package for a federal employee is $119,982, an employee working for a private corporation $59,909.
A Tsunami is coming to America and it is building from within. A cleaning house in Washington is needed. It is enough to make you want to do something.
Don't Tread on Me has taken new meaning in 2010.

Unions - A Government Entity

Unions have passed a milestone that has been a long time coming. There are more union members working for the government then for private industry. This has been trending for years but the scale has been tipped. Why would this be the case? Unions extract better working conditions and pay from the employer. A private business will be constrained by the dollar value of any increase by the limit in revenue. The governments are in no such position. When government employees demand more pay, governments simply raise taxes. Whether it is the air traffic controllers making in excess of $125,000 a year working 32 weeks. They still work forty hours a week but eight hours are overtime. Sweet Deal, anyone have something like this in the private industry? Or if it's TSA, who is about to unionize it's workforce. Currently airport security costs ten times what was spent in 2001, and that is about to rise when the screeners get bargaining rights. We will all pay through higher taxes. Every dollar spent on security is a wasted dollar for the economy. Security produces nothing. Terrorists win when we cripple ourselves through the idea of being "safe".
Unions helped build this country and created the middle class. That was then, but this is now. How did unions help drive GM out of business? Is there a place for unions in the modern world where business has evolved to a point where it is the business's best interest to treat the employee well. Private employers learned the lesson from the union of old and I do not think there is one instance of a business taking advantage of it's workforce because there is no union. As most of you know, I own a Restaurant and Comedy Club, and my corporate background includes time working with Unite Here. There was no advantage for the staff in having the union, as a matter of fact, it made my job easier because I did not have to worry about my employees, just he contract rules. In the end the contract was used against improvements for the staff more then it helped the staff. Unlike some managers I embraced the union's contract and it made my job easier, not having to worry about the staff since everything I was allowed to do was written out in contract form. I knew the contract better then the shop steward and it showed during grievances. I never lost one out of dozens filed against me. I know for a fact that hiring is hampered in a union setting. Managers are very reluctant to hiring new employees where a union is involved. Excellence is not something the union wants to talk about. They much prefer the discussions stay on minimal performance levels. If one employee does better then another, everyone will be expected to perform at that level so there is no incentive to excel. The incentive is to do as little as possible to keep every one's hours maxed out.
What purpose do unions play in the future world? In developing countries where working conditions are horrible, unionization will help the people. Where ever there is a missing middle class, a union would take workers from the lower class and create a middle class. Unions really helped build this country into what it is today. That does not mean that they are still fighting for good. It seems unions today are all about entrenched power and money for the elite. Sound similar to the political class we have created also.
Ask any person involved with unions (even teamsters) and ask what is most corrupt union today? The answer is Service International. Happens to be the number one visitor to the White House averaging 1.1 visits per week. Does he have an office there or something?
Union Leadership and Washington's Political Leadership are fighting for their survival in a battle that is just beginning. The loser will be the American taxpayer. We need to clean house.

True for union leadership or elected office. Get elected, do what you need to do, return to your life. How many union leaders actually work in a union job now? How many politicians know how to run a business? Prove it, like Mark Warner from Virginia, one term as governor, did an excellent job, went back to his family, then decided to run for senate, won and is currently working hard for Virginians. Will he run for reelection? Should he run for reelection? He is someone whose opinion I greatly respect and I would like to ask him his opinion on one term and gone.
It takes a great man to take himself out of office. George Washington was offered to be king of the new land and turned it down and insisted on transfer of power through the executive branch. That single act has changed history. GW proved that man can overcome his nature and do what is best for everyone and not be selfish. How hard would it of been for Ted Kennedy to not seek reelection? Patrick Kennedy has done it and he is going to use his life to help others. Does that mean he will never serve again? Not a chance, this is the way it was meant to be done. Serve, go home to work, possibly serve again in another position, do the job and go home to do again if the situation warrants. Would Massachusetts been better served by eight different senators with eight different sets of ideas and experiences or one man for forty eight years?

Need a Couple of Days in the Sun?

After doing hours of research on the Internet for an inexpensive long weekend away, I thought i would share the results with you.. Three Nights with Airfare allowing us to get away Monday and returning Thursday back to work for the weekend. All inclusive would be nice but not necessary.
The hands down winner for a short trip like this is Grand Bahama Island followed by Nassau. The airfare is a big part of it. The best deal was to the Wyndam Grand Bahama all inclusive with air for $777 a couple. Yes a couple. Reviews were mixed so step out of the inclusive and stay at Lacaya and you can do that with out the inclusive but much nicer accommodations and location. In the heart of Lacaya with its market shops, restaurants, casino and beach or the resort thirty minutes in a cab away.
The next destination to show up is Mexico with the beautiful Oasis resorts. The trip can be had for $1200 inclusive. It is Mexico and that has both good things attached to it and some really bad things attached to it so you would have to decide for yourself.
Worth mentioning is the Carnival Cruise out of Baltimore every Sunday. Seven days starting at $1000 per couple. Anyone considering a trip should consider it because without the cost of airfare getting to and from the port, cruises become fairly inexpensive. Balcony room on a cruise in March is $1300 for a couple. They are serious about their fun on Carnival.
Next on the list was Dominican Republic with a couple traveling for three nights and air with inclusive stay coming in at $1600.For that range the Carribean opens up for you ranging from St. Thomas to Aruba with great deals. Compare these with a trip to Miami Beach costing $800 without F&B.
Just thought I could help someone get out of town and enjoy themselves even if it is just for two full days. I like to count the days that you wake up and go to sleep in the hotel as real vacation days. This trip nets you two real days of fun in the sun.

Newt Gingrich and President Obama Agreeing?

Less Government, emphasis on more commercial services. This is what President Obama proposes in the new NASA budget. It is a great idea whose time has come. Recommended many times by bipartisan committees and boards but ignored by NASA, this change of emphasis for NASA allows greater exploration and less of the "grunt" work of space travel. That is largely the transporting of equipment and supplies into low orbit. With the closure of the Space Shuttle program the lift capacity of this country is greatly reduced. Russia will be utilized and not to leave us dependent on the Russians, NASA has been using commercial launches for years.
Commercial launches will open space to many more people and result in jobs that our future can be built around. This is a jobs program with lasting effect like the Apollo project, which produced many commercial benefits. Not just products like Velcro but engineers and an increase of knowledge still being exploited today around the world,
By getting out of the low orbit business NASA is free to do what it was designed for: Exploration.
The low orbit world has become a business zone and NASA should willingly walk away to greater things. In the final frontier, the exploration of space, it seems there can be real bipartisanship if President Obama and Newt Gingrich agree. Health Care Reform in Space?

Health Care Reform part II Reducing Costs

Health Care reform needs to have a process of determining what solutions have been working at the state level and move them to a national level. States have been acting as laboratories for health care reform for decades and there is plenty of evidence out there of what works and doesn't work. This seems like the logical way to go about it.
Not in Washington DC, logic has nothing to do what is occurring in DC. Logic has left the capital a long time ago and is sorely missed. Logic would tell you to work with others nicely, because one day they might be in charge , as support grows for one term and your out, these issues just disappear forever short memories do not carry grudges.
One of the most successful Health Care reforms enacted by the states has been Tort Reform. Now that is a very dirty word among democratic leadership. What got me interested in Tort Reform was a response from Nancy Pelosi about why it would not work. It was such a bad performance it made me think if she is so against it to sound this stupid defending not doing anything, there must be something to it. So the deeper I looked and the more I read the better Tort Reform looks. It has contained costs in every state that has enacted reform. How can any of the elected representatives from the states where it has proven successful not be in support of it. Both republicans and democrats are guilty. How can anyone be against it if it is good for just about everyone. Well that last just about everyone means someone will be effected by it and they won't be happy. You know I am referring to the trail lawyers. Howard Dean came out and said it, "we can afford to anger the trail lawyers". Four of the top seven donors for Majority Leader Harry Reid's campaign are trail lawyer associations. Ms Nancy Pelosi manages to have four of her top eight donors be trail lawyers. This is as special as "special interests" get. In ten years these associations have donated $1 Billion to federal campaigns and $1 Billion to state elections. That is a lot of money! That will but a lot of influence. The time has come for change, just not the change that we were promised.

A Few Good Men Destroyed in DC

Washington DC has a way of destroying good men. They come to town with integrity and character and it seems to be drained out of them the longer they serve. There are bad men who get elected also, but not much can be done to them except get them out of office (One Term Limit would accomplish this).
The people who I want to discuss are good people when they get here. When "fiscal conservatives" arrive in town screaming of cutting spending, take as much pork as "liberal spenders" by justifying to themselves that if they did not do it they would be short changing their districts. How about standing up for your principles that got you elected in the first place, which was not to secure as much pork as possible. Although by doing such a thing it sure helps your reelection campaign through taxpayer dollars. The incentive is there so you can continue to be reelected regardless of the needs of your district. (see Murtha International Airport with two flights daily) One more large reason why one term and your out would be a great thing. The incentive would be to do what is right in your opinion, not what is best for reelection.
The founding fathers wrote as much about character as they did about actions when describing others and events of their day. Today character seems to be dismissed as old fashioned notion that has no place in today's world. Of course Tiger Woods comes to mind here, but it could be many other names, Kobe Bryant, Gary Hart, Jack Welch, Wilt Chamberlain, or JFK. I am not talking about a relationship where it is open, but a traditional marriage where each person makes a promise to his/her own idea of a higher power that they will remain faithful to their partner. I am not a prude and am not trying to cast judgement but using a person's past to create a judgement about their future behavior is just good business, someone who would break their promise they have made to themselves and the person closest to them in life, would be more likely to break a promise to you also. Is there such a thing as a good dad but a poor husband? Or is one of the requirements of being a good father the fact that you need to be a good husband also? Can you run a large organization well but be a horrible father/mother? These questions come to mind as I type away here hoping that if we discuss these things in the open it will help make myself a better person all around.

Health Care Reform Now...easy just listen

Health Care has been undergoing reforming for years now. It seems that we have 50 different approaches to the issue from the fifty different states. So why don't we put them all side by side and see what works and what doesn't. Seems too simple for real life doesn't it? There are a couple of issues that have to be addressed. They are the rising costs and increased coverage for more people. Lets look at increasing coverage so more people have the opportunity to purchase insurance. That does not mean everyone will choose to buy it though, and that should be a personal choice to make.
Ted Kennedy was never for universal coverage, his original idea was anyone working 40 hours of week would have affordable insurance as an option. The Great State of Hawaii has taken it a step further with what seems to my distant view as successful. I would welcome more people whom are more familiar with the system there to speak up and be heard. One would think this would be a good thing but in the current political situation anyone speaking up is attacked personally. Where are the elected representatives of the states that have been successful pushing their ideas to a national stage?
Hawaii passed a law requiring employers to offer insurance for every employee working 20 hours a week. They have achieved over 90% coverage and the system is highly touted by all sides. I would like to hear from the employers and see what it has done to them. I own a restaurant with 11 employees and what would the cost to me be? Can the cost be mitigated by reducing the payroll tax from 7% down to 4%? There are many other ideas out there that need to be heard. The President has talked a great game about listening to ideas and considering them, but his reality has been different. Hopefully Obama really means it when he says he wants to listen to the best ideas out there.
Another idea that needs to be discussed further is lowering the age of Medicare to 18. The system is already built to handle all the processes. it would just need to be expanded. Why create an entirely new bureaucracy when the infrastructure is already there?
There are too many good ideas out there not being heard or considered due to the political paralysis in Washington.

Term Limits - THE Answer to Todays Political Stalemate

Term Limits is an idea whose time has come. The country would be better served by its' elected officials if they officals were limited to one term in office at a time. The history of the country has politics as a part time occupation by real people working in the real world. The founding fathers warned time and time again against the creeping of power to the entrenched political class. Goerge Mason and James Madison both wrote as warnings that we have failed to heed as todays elected officials live as Roman Princes where the world is there for their pleasure. Junkets, insurance, banking, loans, all special circumstances for elected officails different then what you or I would recieve as a citizen. There should be no difference. Travel by coach in crowded airports and deal with security check points and delays just like the rest of us so then maybe something can be done about it.

Does anyone think that Ted Kennedy (taking his best at heart) serving for 48 years is better for the citizens of Massachuettes he served then if eight different people with eight different sets of experiences and eight different sets of proposals as answers to our problems had served as Senator. Rep John Murtha served 18 terms in the house. Did all the pork he secured for his district really make it worth while? Is it even better for his own district who might have gained federal largeness due to his oversized influence in the defense indusrty at what cost to their neighbors who were shorted what they gained? Is the country better off then if none of the pork was ever spent? 18 different people with 18 different suggestions and ideas on solving the countries problems never to be heard from due to the power of the incumbent. Not to belittle his accomplishments, which are great and varied, but is he not the problem which we would want term limits to avoid for us. Who remebers Abscam? Murtha was an unidicted coconspirator and still managed to get reelected. He should of served and moved on but the attraction of easy money and perks grows on you like a cancer. Remember Power corrupts all (any) of us so it is understandable to not want to relinquish the grip, but come on, it has become obscene.
Ethics probes, shady political action committees, Special Investigators, all costing millions of dollars a year could all be eliminated with term limits. One term and off you go. Good or Bad.

Example of Virginia - Virginia is one of the best governed states in the country and we have term limits on our Governor. The Governor may not serve consectutive terms. Because of this Virginia has had a steady stream of "Great" Governors coming from both national political parties. The person is elected, deals with the hand they have been dealt, and does their best for the state and moves on. No reelection worries getting in the way of the duties of their elected office. Wilder, Allen, Warner, Kaine, McDougal all did very well. Even if they did not do wonderful things they are gone before doing too much damage, and on to the next one. How can we expect a Congressman who is constantly running a relection campaign to really focus on the task of governing the country? Let alone deciding to do what is best for the country not his own self interest. In Virginia there is always talk about repealing the limits on the governor job but they never go anywhere in the committees. So even where we see success with term limits there are people who are opposed, usually the ones who are limited by the limits.

Addressing the issue of lobbyists gaining undue influence since all elected officials are "rookies". The lobbyists power would actually diminish with term limits. Think about it, if you were elected to an office and you are not worried about getting reelected, would you be influenced by outside opinions or would you do what you set out to do and get it done and go back to your life at home. There would be no donations year after year adding up to hundreds of thoudands of dollars which any sane person would admit will influence your thinking. It would be pretty awesome that every two years the entir ehouse turned over. Choas in a good way. Imagine the election of the Speaker of the House every two years and having a new person each time. Possibly might want to consider a three term limit for the House equalling the six years a Senator would serve in his one term.

Which person is more beholden to special interests and lobbyists? Compare the mindset of a new congressman who just got elected and is on a mission, which is why he ran in the first place, not worried about winning reelection or the congressman who just got elected and wants to stay in office and that becomes his primary concern, which is undertandable and not a bad thing. It just produces different results. But it is not good for the function of the position and the good of the country.

Time for a New Republican Party

The failure of political leadership over the last 20+ years has set the foundation for a third national party. Throughout our history the two major parties have evolved to a point where they lose touch with the people they claim to represent and a third party pops up and takes one of the existing party original credentials. Usually one of the two existing parties, usually the minority, will absorb the ideas of the upstart and call them their own. Which in the case of the Tea Party and the Republican Party, would amount to a discovering of the original conservative movement. Today Ronald Reagan would be a Tea Partier, not a Republican. As a matter of fact, Ronald Reagan would be disgusted with today's Republican Party.
The Tea Party will start fielding candidates for elections all over the country. And as the idea spreads so will the strength of a third party. My prediction is that 20 years from now the Republican Party will of developed into a national force originating from the Tea Party of today.

What Do You Speak Out About?

You can tell a lot about someone by what they are passionate about. The flip side is also what they are not passionate about says something also. Let's start with Haiti and the Americans who have been arrested. This is not the time for nice diplomacy. The Secretary of State, who is responsible for Americans travelling overseas, should be on her soap box demanding their release. She should be backed up by the President if her words are not heeded by the "government" of Haiti. Both have been largely silent on the subject.
This situation is even more important since it involves American citizens but is similar to the Guatemalan constitutional crisis, where our administration sided with Venezuela, against the Guatemalan constitution and with a fascist. Completely baffled on this one, and no hard questions were asked or answers given as to why.

President Obama has chosen to speak up about the bonuses on Wall Street but continues to pay out bonuses to federal workers. USA Today pointed out the fact that 18 months ago there was 1 (one) employee making more then $170,000 working in the Department of Transportation, today there are 1690 (one thousand six hundred ninety). That is $287,300,000 ($287 million) in payroll just for those 1690 employees not counting benefits as health & life insurance, along with paid time off which is convertible to cash PER YEAR. Where is the outrage?
How much of a raise did you receive this year? Are you just glad to be working? The disconnect between the political elite and the average American has grown so wide it is not sustainable.

If it was not so real it would be funny department- a comment I read referring to the Obama Administration as a remake as a reality show of the West Wing. ( a masterpiece of a series)
For a group that bills itself as so smart they sure do stupid things regularly. We should always question the intelligence of someone who is bragging how smart they are. They tend to over emphasis the importance of intelligence in running the country (see Welcome Back Carter).

Republicans as Bad as Obama - 3rd Party Time!

A number of comments I have received seem to indicate that I have been attacking the president because I am truly a closet Republican. Rereading my posts I can not disagree with their conclusion.
So to be clear, the Republicans are the party of nothing. Not even worth mentioning to complain about. Their is no opposition to the president. He sets the agenda and defines the debates. The Republicans are reactionary at best. Where are the "true" conservatives out there? Where are alternate proposals for Health Care or Energy? Where are the fiscal conservatives these days? Have not seen one of them since the eighties. That was 30 years ago.
Today's conservatives says since the wasteful spending has been passed I need my share of it also. Instead of sticking to their convictions and be able to call the president out and point to how they have refused to be a party of the orgy of tax payer dollars. They justify it by saying they would not be doing the job the public elected them to do if they did not go after the money. This is the statements made by all of the leading conservatives of congress. Bond, MO....Wilson SC.....Alexander, TN....Bennett, UT all have gone after federal pork with a vengeance and then criticize the president about spending too much. Try Practicing what you preach.
George Mason wrote in the late 1700s that when our legislators start making different laws for themselves rather then being treated the same as the citizenry we have begun our decline. This has been occurring in Washington more and more these days. health care, Air Travel, Retirement, Bouncing Checks for free , deficit spending - doing all kinds of things that we, the public, could never get away with in the "real" world.
Washington is broken and the we need a clean slate to right the ship. With the Republicans and Democrats both spending recklessly (see Bush and Obama's records) it is time for a third party to emerge. It has begun with the tea party protests and if it really is populist anger that is fueling them, watch out. It is time to throw the politicians out of Washington and let the people take over. Stay tuned for more on the cleaning out of Washington.

Can We Believe the President Anymore?

President Obama is on the verge of imploding. There is a book by Stephen R. Covey called the Speed of Trust and shows how a high trust environment will produce multiple times the output of a low trust culture. High Trust cultures are difficult to create and even harder to maintain but the payoff is rather large. The president talks a great game but does not seem to be able to back up his lofty talk with reality. Whether health care or the economy we are never sure whether the president is telling the truth or not. Saying one thing and doing something completely different has become all too common in Washington.
Let's look at Energy
Nuclear Power. During the State of the Union Obama stated he supports "building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants" but in his budget funds have been slashed for Yucca mountain in Nevada. So he says lets push nuclear power but at the same time makes it impossible to deal with the waste. Talk but no money does not show support of the subject.
Gas & Oil Leases
Contrary to public statements supporting off shore drilling to decrease reliance on imported oil the president's budget shows decreasing revenue from the leases in 2011 signaling the administration's true intent of phasing them back not increasing the drilling. Even if one does not agree with his position, at least stick to your beliefs instead of trying to be everything to everyone.
Whether it is transparency, or lobbyists, or posting bills online for review, or Health care, we the people have no idea whether the President means what he says or even believes what he says. He trys to sound wonderful to everyone listening without worrying about accomplishing what he says. What the country is losing is very important to our future, our ability to believe in what the president says.

Pultizer Prize for the National Enquirer, Whose Your Daddy?

The national media used to be called the fourth estate because it provided a much needed check on the three branches of government. What has happened with the election of Barack Obama? He is a wonderful man and a gifted speaker but the lack of institutional cynicism coming from the news reporters is sorely missed not only as a challenge to unsupported claims, but also to fine tune arguments to help get the message out. The give and take, back and forth is good for democracy.
You know when you have a timeline and certain points are highlighted as significant to the subject matter of the timeline, well I think we might of just had one of those events on the timeline of the demise of 20th century media. The National Enquirer has been nominated for a Pulitzer Prize for investigative reporting.
One of my biggest issues with this award is that it is VERY much deserved and the National Enquirer should win, although with the bias in the media world, that they will win is doubtful. But they were nominated and that should be a wake up call to all those national newspapers and reporters out there that just fall in line and follow each other over the cliffs like lemmings. The National Enquirer followed the story from beginning to end. All of the other media outlets dismissed the story as unworthy of them. The Enquirer's reporters kept after it, digging and researching, like real reporters are suppose to do. The spoon feeding has domesticated the reporter corp to the point they think they are dependent on the government for their survival.
After years of denials and dead ends the newspaper was vindicated when the truth came out.....John Edwards was the baby's daddy after all. The Enquirer had it right from the beginning.

Populst Anger, Solution or Death Spiral?

Populist Anger, Is that Obama's solution to his problems? Redirect attention somewhere else?
It seems that the White House thinks it is in an election, with campaigning and fund raising but no substance. Now is the time for workable solutions, not pie in the sky wish lists. Campaigning is not going to stop the back lash from the failed policies and poor selection of candidates. Bringing back campaign strategists to work in the White House will not create good policy.

I have trouble understanding the administration's problem with other people's bonuses. Their own, no problem but give someone a pre-agreed upon compensation and get treated like a criminal. All the while criminals are treated to overnight stays in the Lincoln Bedroom. As former President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, current Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was the person who negotiated on the people's behalf with AIG and that was the time to wring concessions from the company about the bonuses not complain later. Once again with an Obama appointee you are left wondering, "Is it incompetence, or something else?" I wonder where Mr Geither will work after his time at the Treasury department is over? A bank on Wall Street perhaps???

I have lived in and operated a small business in the City of Alexandria and become familiar with anti-business practices. Yes, Everyone says they are for business, but then time and time again create policies and procedures that hinder business growth and creation. Now it seems that this issue is going national. We can not have a federal government that is against business. Small Businesses (which even Fortune 500 companies started as) is the engine that has driven this country for over 200 years. Why not create an environment that fosters business creation? I am not sure what Obama stands for (problem there don't you think) but we are learning what he does not stand for. Business. He has also shown us he is defintely not for keeping the government out of our lives.

Unless Obama can do some serious damage control, it looks like
Yes, We Can has become Four and Out.

Welcome Back Carter (or was it Kotter)

Jimmy Carter is a great man. He has been successful in leading a good life and setting an example for others to follow. He has raised a wonderful family and been a devoted husband his entire adult life. With all this said, He was a horrible president.
Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Bush II, Clinton, all had shall we say character defects that perhaps made them less of a saint, but managed to be successful presidents. Coincidence? I think not. Bush I was a great man, but his presidency did not meet his own expectations, Following Reagan would have been tough on anyone. His raised a very successful family while being faithful to his wife for longer then I have been alive. One son president and so far another Governor of Florida, maybe another president someday.
Where does this leave Barack Obama? My personal take on it is he means well and in his heart he wants to help others live a better life, but reality has a way of disrupting the best laid plans. I feel Barack Obama is on route to being one of the worst (if not the worst) president in the modern era.
Ronald Reagan often said the reason he was successful was he surrounded himself with greatness. I think the exact opposite is Obama's downfall, he has surrounded himself with marginal players in key positions. His most important jobs are staffed with not so great people. Never mind politics, or liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat, but just a simple good or bad.
VP Joe Biden - will anyone defend this selection?

Sec State - Hillary, Obama's number one rival in the state department. Watch when she resigns next year so she can run against his failed presidency. She has done a better job at Sec State then Obama as president and that will haunt him during the primaries.

Sec Defense - Gates as a hold over from the Bush era has done well. He is a good man doing his best for the country. Obama's best performer so far and he inherited him from his nemisis W.

Attorney General - what more needs to be said other then letting the fox run the chicken coop. Just not a very nice person either. Dishonest is the way he is described by those close to him. (Justice Dept will be receiving more then it's share of comments here going forward) see IG firing, Black Panther dismissal, tax cheats, political shenanigans

Chief of Staff - an over looked position unless you study the great presidents. They all had great chief of staffs. As gatekeeper to the President, the influence is out sized. And Obama has a political hack in the job. He is a hatchet man so his performance should be no surprise to anyone. The real question is who picked him for as Chief of Staff? We know the answer and once again it reflects poorly on Obama. Chief of Staff should be focused on Planning and Execution. Two things that are sorely lacking in the White House and it starts at the top. Execution as in making it work, not killing your opponent. Instead his focus is on hurting the opposition party not doing what is best for the country or even the President.

Let me know what you think and look forward to the next post titled Pultizer Prize for the National Enquirer.

The Real Comedy Zone

Everyone keeps telling me to share some thoughts about Comedy with you. Well, my first thought is the real comedy is happening on the front pages of the newspapers in the White House. Now to set the record straight, I am a registered democrat and supported Hillary during the campaign. I had all the hope that everyone else had when he was elected, but he has lost touch with those who elected him. He is being destroyed not by the Republicans, but by his own party in congress and his own elitism. Pelosi will be most responsible for the failed presidency of Barack Obama. Although another big culprit will be not listening very well. The fact that he has surrounded himself with people who only care about themselves shows poor judgement on his part. If it wasn't so real it would be hilarious.
Some of his selections for positions defy logic. The prevert who is the safe school czar. Tax cheats to work at the IRS, the irony is not lost on the public but Obama does not get it. The fiasco that is the IG firing, which leads to Michelle's hand not Barack's. The dimissal of charges against Obama supporters at the polling precient in Philadelphia. Lots to think and write about.
Stay tuned more to come.