In 1994 after a wholesale rejection of what was known at the time as HillaryCare, President Clinton used the State of the Union Speech to announce that the "era of big government is over." Clinton moved to the center and passed legislation such as welfare reform (though he did veto it twice). After going on a liberal bender with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and health care reform, Clinton's survivalist mentality prevailed and he settled for an incrementalist agenda. Obama has made clear in his State of the Union speech that he has no such survivalist inclinations.
One is led to believe Obama would have denied his dismal first year where healthcare reform stalled and cap and trade was dead on arrival if not for the election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts. Even after that, his "moderation" is little more than window dressing. His plan to enact a spending freeze while maintaining a largely unspent stimulus that serves as a slush fund to Democratic pet projects is at best disingenuous. Even then, the freeze only affects 1/6 of the budget. In two years, Obama raised the discretionary, nonsecurity domestic spending by 24%. Freezing spending after that is much like going on a diet after a hotdog eating contest.
Having been satisfied that he "checked the box" for fiscal responsibility, he curiously overlooked his policy of Mirandizing terrorists like the underwear bomber. He grappled awkwardly with the solution to unemployment referencing the deficit “in which we find ourselves” not mentioning his quadrupling of the deficit including his $800 million stimulus. Obama even took a shot at the Supreme Court for overturning campaign-finance reform that violated the first Amendment.
Obama will have to work with Republicans to pass any version of healthcare reform but has been hesitant to scrap the bills that the House and Senate passed separately last year. Obama has signaled willingness to utilize nuclear power and drill offshore but if he intends to add these provisions to his current version of cap and trade, he will still be imposing a regressive tax on all Americans.
Obama threw conservatives and moderates few bones during the speech and only when the details are fleshed out will we determine which strings are attached. Another year of legislative gridlock will cause Obama to lose more seats in the '10 elections so the onus is on him to reach across the aisle. After his State of the Union, I'm just not sure he has any intention to.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Harry Reid: Racist?
The media has been buzzing with the story about Harry Reid unearthed in the latest political book, Game Change. In the book, Reid is recorded to have said about Obama that he was electable because he is 'light-skinned and with no Negro dialect unless he wants to have one.'
Reid immediately called up Obama, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton. All of which offered Reid absolution. One understands why Reid might call Obama since Obama was the one he supposedly slighted but why call Jackson and Sharpton? Because they represent all black people? What is Reid trying to imply here?
Kidding aside, the racial discussion in this country is a comedy of manners. Although we constantly berate ourselves for not talking more about race, whenever someone really does mention race they are excoriated. Reid's defenders say he was only saying a truth with some 'curious' terminology but what is so offensive about the term 'Negro'? Isn't there a United Negro College Fund? Negro is a race classification in the 2010 census.
Meanwhile, the media largely ignore the more obvious examples of racism on the left. For example, there was almost no media coverage of Robert Bryd, a Democratic Senator and ex-KKK member, when he used the term "white nigger."
Normally I'd have a laugh at Reid's expense and say that it is about time that the left start eating their own but the Reid example shows that now even the politically protected class cannot have a conversation about race. It is telling that even though we have abolished slavery, demolished Jim Crow and raised the standard of living for the average black (or African American or...) family, we still do not have an agreed-upon term to use in the discussion. Unfortunately those who seek to benefit from injustices or perceived injustices like Sharpton and Jackson need some ambiguity to further their careers. Reid should just be thankful that, in this case, they were quick to forgive.
Reid immediately called up Obama, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton. All of which offered Reid absolution. One understands why Reid might call Obama since Obama was the one he supposedly slighted but why call Jackson and Sharpton? Because they represent all black people? What is Reid trying to imply here?
Kidding aside, the racial discussion in this country is a comedy of manners. Although we constantly berate ourselves for not talking more about race, whenever someone really does mention race they are excoriated. Reid's defenders say he was only saying a truth with some 'curious' terminology but what is so offensive about the term 'Negro'? Isn't there a United Negro College Fund? Negro is a race classification in the 2010 census.
Meanwhile, the media largely ignore the more obvious examples of racism on the left. For example, there was almost no media coverage of Robert Bryd, a Democratic Senator and ex-KKK member, when he used the term "white nigger."
Normally I'd have a laugh at Reid's expense and say that it is about time that the left start eating their own but the Reid example shows that now even the politically protected class cannot have a conversation about race. It is telling that even though we have abolished slavery, demolished Jim Crow and raised the standard of living for the average black (or African American or...) family, we still do not have an agreed-upon term to use in the discussion. Unfortunately those who seek to benefit from injustices or perceived injustices like Sharpton and Jackson need some ambiguity to further their careers. Reid should just be thankful that, in this case, they were quick to forgive.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Steele Not Showing His Mettle
What is wrong with Michael Steele? The former Maryland Lieutenant Governor and current head of the RNC seems erratic and unfocused. Though he seemed like a rough and tumble guy who was a proud conservative during his unsuccessful run for the Senate, he now appears timid and unsure.
Just some of the odd things he has said since being RNC chairman are:
1. Steele told Sean Hannity of Fox News that the GOP cannot win back a majority in the House in 2010. Besides the fact that everything points to big Republican wins in the next election, the job of head of a political party is to be a cheerleader, not a detractor.
2. In remarks that CNN aired on March 1, Steele said that he, rather than Rush Limbaugh, is “the de facto leader of the Republican Party. Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer. Rush Limbaugh’s whole thing is entertainment. Yes, it is incendiary. Yes, it is ugly.”
3. Responding to a comment by TV One’s Roland Martin that “white Republicans have been scared of black folks,” Steele replied, “You’re absolutely right.” The first African-American RNC chairman, Steele continued, “I’ve been in the room, and they’ve been scared of me. I’m like, I’m on your side.”
4. On Fox, when Hannity expressed surprise at Steele's comment that Republicans wouldn't be able to take back the House, Steele allowed that “I don’t know yet” whether Republicans could win a majority because candidates still are being lined up.
“But then,” Steele said, “the question we need to ask ourselves is, if we do that, are we ready?”
Hannity asked Steele what his answer is.
“I don’t know,” Steele said.
5. When questioned about his odd behavior, “Get a life,” Steele snapped. “If you don’t want me in the job, fire me. But until then, shut up. Get with the program.”
With Republicans in a good position to pick up some seats in and the House and Senate, we need strong and determined leaders who see the goal and work towards it. If Steele is feeling wishy-washy, he needs to go.
Just some of the odd things he has said since being RNC chairman are:
1. Steele told Sean Hannity of Fox News that the GOP cannot win back a majority in the House in 2010. Besides the fact that everything points to big Republican wins in the next election, the job of head of a political party is to be a cheerleader, not a detractor.
2. In remarks that CNN aired on March 1, Steele said that he, rather than Rush Limbaugh, is “the de facto leader of the Republican Party. Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer. Rush Limbaugh’s whole thing is entertainment. Yes, it is incendiary. Yes, it is ugly.”
3. Responding to a comment by TV One’s Roland Martin that “white Republicans have been scared of black folks,” Steele replied, “You’re absolutely right.” The first African-American RNC chairman, Steele continued, “I’ve been in the room, and they’ve been scared of me. I’m like, I’m on your side.”
4. On Fox, when Hannity expressed surprise at Steele's comment that Republicans wouldn't be able to take back the House, Steele allowed that “I don’t know yet” whether Republicans could win a majority because candidates still are being lined up.
“But then,” Steele said, “the question we need to ask ourselves is, if we do that, are we ready?”
Hannity asked Steele what his answer is.
“I don’t know,” Steele said.
5. When questioned about his odd behavior, “Get a life,” Steele snapped. “If you don’t want me in the job, fire me. But until then, shut up. Get with the program.”
With Republicans in a good position to pick up some seats in and the House and Senate, we need strong and determined leaders who see the goal and work towards it. If Steele is feeling wishy-washy, he needs to go.
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Christmas Massacre Averted: Update
I prayed for a second Christmas day miracle in my first blog post on the subject of the underwear bomber and it is obvious I was pressing my luck. Obama interrupted his vacation to pay lip service to the event. Krauthammer points out:
'More jarring still were Obama's references to the terrorist as a "suspect" who "allegedly tried to ignite an explosive device." You can hear the echo of FDR: "Yesterday, December 7, 1941 -- a date which will live in infamy -- Japanese naval and air force suspects allegedly bombed Pearl Harbor."'
The speech was so terrible and muted that Obama had to give a second speech the next day. The second speech even included a reference to the "War On Terror" whereas Obama had previously stated we were involved in an "Overseas Contingency Operation."
Janet Napolitano assured us that the system worked! Then she said it didn't work. Then Obama finally settled the issue by saying the system definitely did not work.
Worst of all, the Nigerian terrorist is not being interrogated by the intelligence community, he is being given a lawyer and there is talk of a plea bargain if he turns on his co-conspirators. Talk about a pre-9/11 mindset!
Obama has completely misread his mandate. Many people had problems with aspects of the War on Terror. On the other hand, most people recognize it is not a war that we chose. The 9/11 Commission said that the Islamists were at war with us but we were not at war with them. Regardless of people's feelings regarding certain parts of the War on Terror, there are people who do want to kill American civilians. Obama, as President, has a right to tweak the Bush policy. However, if he simply chooses to ignore the conflict and not learn from history, he is doomed to repeat it.
'More jarring still were Obama's references to the terrorist as a "suspect" who "allegedly tried to ignite an explosive device." You can hear the echo of FDR: "Yesterday, December 7, 1941 -- a date which will live in infamy -- Japanese naval and air force suspects allegedly bombed Pearl Harbor."'
The speech was so terrible and muted that Obama had to give a second speech the next day. The second speech even included a reference to the "War On Terror" whereas Obama had previously stated we were involved in an "Overseas Contingency Operation."
Janet Napolitano assured us that the system worked! Then she said it didn't work. Then Obama finally settled the issue by saying the system definitely did not work.
Worst of all, the Nigerian terrorist is not being interrogated by the intelligence community, he is being given a lawyer and there is talk of a plea bargain if he turns on his co-conspirators. Talk about a pre-9/11 mindset!
Obama has completely misread his mandate. Many people had problems with aspects of the War on Terror. On the other hand, most people recognize it is not a war that we chose. The 9/11 Commission said that the Islamists were at war with us but we were not at war with them. Regardless of people's feelings regarding certain parts of the War on Terror, there are people who do want to kill American civilians. Obama, as President, has a right to tweak the Bush policy. However, if he simply chooses to ignore the conflict and not learn from history, he is doomed to repeat it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
