I haven't posted for a while, but once again, I feel compelled. There has been a lot of talk lately on radio and TV about "people who hate Barack Obama." In truth, unless Mr. Obama's personal sphere of influence is much larger than I can believe, I seriously doubt that there are enough people who actually hate Barack Obama to warrant any public comment.

Most of America hates, despises, and fears Barack Obama's policies, and for excellent reasons. Personally, none of us really give a fig about the man himself. We will probably not meet at church, our kids don't play with his kids at school, we are not neighbors, and neither he nor his wife are likely to be occupying the next cubicle at work. On a personal level, he is completely irrelevant, and we have no feelings about him either for or against.

No, what we hate is the idea that we have a communist in the White House, and he is determined to spread that particularly disgusting social disease by whatever means necessary. Yes, we do want him stopped cold, but it is nothing personal. We just don't want to live in a communist country. Most of us find that position quite reasonable, and not ideologically blind at all, especially considering the last hundred years or so of world history.

Yes, I am well aware that I have dropped the dreaded "C" bomb twice in one paragraph. I am also well aware that we are not supposed to notice the socialist tendencies of nearly every appointee in the current administration, but come on, people! He may not have a hammer and sickle tattooed on his forehead, but Stalin's Five Year Plans were less socialistic and totalitarian than Obama's ideas of economic stimulus, energy policy, and health care.

Communism can be defined as a fully socialized economy enforced by a fascist dictatorship. It embodies the worst of both economic and political worlds. President Obama has taken majority stockholder positions in two of the nation's three largest automobile companies, has exercised de facto control over the management of most of the financial industry, and has vigorously promoted a socialized medical system to replace private health insurance. He has voided legal contracts and international treaties for his own personal convenience, apologized to our enemies for defending ourselves and our allies, and has proposed legislation designed to bankrupt both producers and consumers of energy, simply by government fiat. And that was only his first hundred days.

Ladies and gentlemen, the evidence is clear, and has been since even before the Democratic Primaries. The current Presidential administration wants to force socialism down the throats of America, and sees no reason to let trivia like freedom and the Constitution stand in the way. I think the time has come for the Naming of True Names. Our President, ladies and gentlemen, is a communist.

So, yes, we do want him stopped. Yes, we do hate everything he stands for. But no, the simple truth is, the man himself is nobody special, and we don't really care about him one way or another. If we could make him retreat to the Oval Office and be quitely Presidential while the rest of us go about our business, that would suit most of us just fine.

 

Heh-heh. "More on health care." "Moron health care." I crack myself up.

I was just listening to the fact that the White House claims that the single payer communist health system they want to install will cost $1 trillion over ten years. Something bothered me about that, so I grabbed a calculator.

In the 2000 census, there were about 450 million Americans total. Let's assume that that number will become 500 million in 2010. Now, the big selling point is that everybody will be covered by the government plan, no exceptions. That means that $1 trillion (12 zeroes) divided by 500 million (6 extra zeroes) is, um, $2000 per person.

Barack Obama says that every man, woman and child in the United States will receive all necessary medical services, including any necessary major surgery, for $200 per Year.

Friends, delivering my oldest child, which occurred with no complications, cost over $5000, including the insurance company's payment. How is the President planning to make that entire process cost less than dinner and a movie? Something is not right here, and my daughter has not smelled like that since before she was two!

Moron health care, indeed. For some reason, I'm not laughing any more.

Like at least several dozen Americans, I have been following the recent Presidential campaign, the economic news, and the political news since the elections with some interest and attention. The general pattern puzzles me.

What the heck is our new President really up to? First he campaigns on the idea that the previous administration is irresponsible because they ran up a $5 trillion debt over an eight year period. Then, to fix the cash shortage, he insists that hundreds of billions of dollars be spent in such a mad rush that nobody even knows what the money is being spent for. Then he introduces a new era of financial responsibility with a proposed budget that makes the most profligate spenders in history look like a bunch of tightwads. This from a man who wants direct control over the salaries of people who actually work for a living because he thinks it is unreasonable that they should be paid at all.

At the same time, he preaches the need to reduce America's dependence on foreign oil, but refuses to permit development of massive domestic oil resources. While sitting on an energy cornucopia that could guarantee cheap energy for the next couple of hundred years, he demands that only the most expensive and least practical energy sources be actively developed. He is pushing for a thinly disguised punitive energy tax that will double, or perhaps triple the cost of energy from existing sources. This, at a time when any cost increase will put more people out of work.

Meanwhile, he is pushing for government control of the entire health care system. That may be great if you have a cold, and all you need is plenty of fluids and some aspirin, but what happens when something is really wrong? I for one do not relish the prospect of waiting for three months or more to have my inflamed appendix removed because surgery requires two specialist opinions and operating rooms are booked for weeks in advance.

Not neglecting foreign affairs, he sends hundreds of millions of dollars to Hamas to buy more weapons for their terrorist activities, tells the radical Moslem world that he will do nothing to inhibit their quest for nuclear weapons, and informs North Korea that they may test intercontinental missile systems at will. Unsatisifed with his progress in destabilizing the Middle East and the Pacific Rim, he tries to sell out our Eastern European allies for diplomatic favors from a belligerent Russia. He also offers several pointed insults to the British Prime Minister, of all people, during a traditional state visit. Even now, he is busily exhorting the governments of the rest of the world to join him in trashing their currencies in order to prevent their economies from outperforming the one he is trying to impoverish as fast as possible.

Ever the patriot, he has authorized the deployment of half the troops required to do more than hold the line in Afghanistan. Nobody can figure out what his policy toward Pakistan will be, but we can be sure that neither the Pakistani people nor their government will like it. The Malignant and Evil Bush plan to withdraw from Iraq has now become the Wise and Benevolent Obama withdrawal plan, which is obviously a completely different thing. And, those poor unfortunates whose only crime was to plot destruction against the United States and her allies are being released as quickly as possible. We all may rejoice that they will no longer be subjected to the intolerable abuse of three square meals a day, relatively comfortable sleeping quarters, and constant media attention at Guantanamo Bay.

So you tell me. Is Barack Obama the most carefully stupid anthropological specimen ever to walk the earth, or is he the most dangerous enemy the free world has ever faced? I honestly do not know, but I don't see a lot of room for middle ground here.

Watch and listen to this video where White House Press Secretary Gibbs "explains" the difference between a "sound" economy and a "strong" one.

Having watched this display, I can not help wondering, do these people ever listen to anything they say?

He confirms that Candidate McCain (notice the diminutive title as he refuses to even call him Senator) was completely deluded to refer to any part of the national economy as "strong." I can only assume he intends us to understand that the economy is definitely and inarguably weak.

In the next breath, he asserts, "Nobody exceeds the United States in our production capacity, uh, in our untrapranool....entrepreneur'l (sic) capacity, in our capacity to innovate, in our research universities, in the depth and the breadth of our capital markets, umm...." Is it just me, or does that not sound pretty strong, as economies go? And am I the only one who heard how the man just could not choke out the word "entrepreneurial?"

Visibly nervous, he stumbles on, "But as the president, addressed in the debates later that fall, ah, he said that the strength of our fundamentals should be med-measured as to whether, um, the middle class is getting a fair shake." Dude! The guy you are talking about was only a candidate then, too! Also, would you mind defining the term "fair shake?" I'm middle class, and I go to work, get paid, and pay my bills. It doesn't get much more fair than that, does it?

Appearing to gain confidence with the ole campaign slogans, he continues,"Unh, are we taking steps to create jobs? Are we taking steps to prevent home foreclosures?" Son, one of these days somebody has got to explain to you where jobs come from, and why foreclosures happen.

He has to think hard again to make this next bit sound even a little acceptable. "Are we taking steps, ahh, to put money back in people's pockets who most deserve it, rather than to continue, unh, tax cuts that reward those that have done, just fine over eight years?" WHAT WAS THAT?

So, now you have it. A sound economy is one that has all the elements required for everyone who participates to succeed to one degree or another. A strong economy, however, seems to be one where the government "takes steps" to create jobs and prevent home foreclosures. Notice that these government "steps" need not succeed in their purpose. They need only be taken.

Above all, a strong economy, as opposed to a sound but weak one, seems to be an economy where the deserving, whoever they are, are given money by government fiat. At the same time, a strong economy ensures that those who have succeeded to any degree in a sound economy are "not rewarded." Lovely.

Let's just skip ahead to the next significant bit.

"The question was, are we going to, uhh, move forward in, uhh, a plan that would create jobs, a plan that would stem home foreclosures, a plan that would reward the middle class with tax cuts..." Hold it right there! Ten seconds ago you said rewarding the middle class with tax cuts had to be stopped to make the economy strong. You want to make up your mind, there, Sparky?

"...and a plan that would reregulate our financial industry, or were we not? I think that debate is largely over? I think that campaign was...won? Uh, by, a particular side...." Then he starts stumbling and mumbling even worse than before.

We need to get one thing straight, guys. What you "won," as you are so fond of saying, is nothing more than the award of a four year employment contract. That contract includes a termination clause, and you people seem to be doing everything in your power to invoke the conditions of that clause. Your objective is simple. It is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, so help you God. Nothing more, nothing less.

Nowhere in your terms of employment is there any reference to redistributing money to those of whom you approve, and nothing in those terms suggests that you are permitted to beggar the nation, punish the productive, cripple and alienate the military, or apologize to the implacable enemies of the very Constitution that you are sworn to defend.

Under no circumstances are you granted unlimited power over any part of the American nation, its people, its economy, or its relations with other nations. You are specifically required to work with the Congress of the United States of America in equal partnership to promote the freedom, prosperity, and general well being of those United States. So far, you do not seem to Play Well With Others, and you seem a bit unclear regarding the duties and responsibilities of the President of the United States.

Ladies and gentlemen of the White House, you have been hired to do one specific job. Would you care to share with us when you might be ready to get started?