Jan
27
(1/27/2010, Los Alamitos) As tonight’s State of the Union address stretched on, with solution after solution to every problem that’s confronted our nation for the past 12 months, I was reminded of the old saying, “When the going gets tough, the tough go shopping.”
And when politicians go shopping, you can guess who’s money they’re spending.
By the time our politician-in-chief was 3/4 of the way through (hopefully), it was beginning to look like Christmas was coming 11 months early in 2010. Certainly, there was something for everyone, but most of it cost quite a bit:
- massive tax cuts
- massive new federal programs
- nuclear energy
- clean energy
- $10,000 per year in tax credits for families per student in college
- College loans that don’t have to be paid back. . . if you choose to work for the government over a private firm!
- Even deficit reduction–by freezing (not reducing) spending on less than 20% of the federal budget.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I was one Los Alamitos politician who welcomed President Obama’s swearing in (see “Proud to be an American,” posted just over a year ago today).
And I’m well aware that President Obama confronted massive challenges when he took office.
But after 12 months of continuing and actually expanding the massive over-spending of the prior administration, unemployment has only gone up, housing is still in grave danger, and our skies and cities remain threatened by terrorism.
Nobody’s perfect, and it’s easy to be critical with the advantage of hindsight. We’re all brilliant when it comes to being a Monday morning quarterback–we all know Farve should never have made that last, intercepted pass. So, at the time, it’s quite possible that the President thought he had the economy covered & could devote all that time and energy to Health Care and the economy would do fine. Maybe he really thought that direct, high deficit FDR-style spending would work better than Bill Clinton’s carefully crafted targeted tax credits that worked so well to overcome the Bush I recession & bank failures. At least Cllinton let his wife focus on health care while he focused on the economy. . . but an overreaching Federal Health Care plan still cost him control of both houses in the 1994 Congressional elections.
I think the President’s right about the need to unite and set aside partisan difficulties, but that would have rung truer if the speech hadn’t been so saturated with partisan rhetoric. Bad habits die hard. . . especially when they got you where you are, as is the case for most politicians.
Well, that’s my initial take on tonight’s State of the Union address (which is still going on. . . just like President Clinton!)
My initial reactions may be showing a bit of my personal inclination to a smaller, not larger government.
That’s why you’ve got free reign to post your own thoughts and responses. After all, this site is primarily designed to be a place where people from our community can discuss issues that affect them. Politely, respectfully, seeking not only to speak or post but also to listen & learn.
So my question to you is, what did you think? Please remember to avoid personal attacks and to use family-friendly language appropriate to our community. Your e-mail address remains private, and you do not need to post using your full name.
Comments
4 Responses to “State of the Union: Was that the President or Santa Claus?”
Leave a Reply
With at most 55 members of the Senate Bush II was able to push through a radical conservative agenda. He cut domestic spending, emptied out the treasury with tax cuts and two wars (one that he didn’t finish so he could start one that need not be started) and appointed more radical conservative justices to appeals and the SCOTUS.
With filibuster proof majorities in both the House and the Senate this President couldn’t get through a public insurance option that over 60% of the population wanted.
So, where are we after a year of Obama’s leadership?
Health Insurance Reform = Failed.
DADT = Failed.
DOMA = Failed.
Progressive Tax Code = Failed.
Transparency in Government = Failed.
Consumer Protection = Failed.
Climate Bill = Failed.
Investment in Green Jobs = Failed.
Close GITMO = Failed.
Out of Iraq = Failed.
Strengthen the Glass–Steagall Act = Failed
In fact, the only promise he has seemed to be able to keep was to increase troops in Afghanistan.
And he was able to fail on all the above in an off-election year with filibuster-proof majorities in both houses of Congress.
What have I learned after one year? I learned that I was right. He was better than McCain, but then again, that’s like saying bread and water was better than starvation.
Obama is great at talking the talk, but he can’t walk the walk. We needed FDR. We thought we were getting JFK. He’s worse than Carter.
Now maybe he was just getting his sea legs. Maybe he just needed some time. I mean he attempted to be bi-partisan meeting with the GOP from both houses of Congress. He seemed to want to bury hatchets (he fought for Lieberman to keep his chairmanship even though Lieberman campaigned for McCain). But between the GOP policy of being the party of “NO!” and the conserva-Dems working with them to make every vote in the Senate require cloture, his peace offerings and attempt to be Lincoln have been a waste of time, one that we couldn’t afford (for instance the wasted tax breaks in the stimulus package that did nothing to stimulate the economy – and yes, the other parts of the stimulus have worked, but while it was enough to put the breaks on the economic slide, it was not enough to pump up production, spending or jobs… don’t believe me, ask Nobel-Prize-winning economists Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz).
So, rather than listen to the flowery oratory that Obama is so good at, I choose to read the actual speech. Amazingly I was looking for something Obama was willing to fight for, and I found nothing. He crabbed at the party of “NO!” and told them to do something. He crabbed at the conserva-Dems and told them to make the Senate work. He crabbed at the SCOTUS for the worst decision since Dred Scott over 150 years ago.
But what I didn’t see was a leader who had learned the lesson of the last year. That if you want something you had better be willing and able to go out and fight for it. To put your political capital on the line and make it happen.
What I really wanted tonight was the following. “A year ago I said that we would have a change in health insurance by tonight. I let this Congress do what they wanted with the goal I outlined for the last year. Today I stand here and I see a Congress that has not been able to accomplish the simple act of allowing every American a better choice for Health Coverage. In response I will make it easier for Congress to move forward. Today I signed an Executive Order dropping the age at which someone may apply for and pay for Medicare to age 0. This will immediately create the competitive health insurance exchange I promised a year ago. There are still over 30 million people that do not have health insurance, now those that can afford it will be able to pay for a plan that is not designed to make massive profits, but designed to provide care. I will leave it to Congress to develop a plan and a path forward for those that can not afford it to be able to have a health insurance plan.”
There is an old phrase, “Lead, follow, or get out of the way.” A President is supposed to lead, not just talk a good game. It’s time for Obama to show that he can lead. This address is meaningless without a leader willing to take charge of the country.
[It should be noted that I am a Progressive Democrat and while I have a list three times as long as the failed list above, that the list above is based on his campaign promises that he has not fulfilled, not my radical progressive agenda. In addition, while I am deeply disappointed in performance, I am well aware that of the two choices we had a bit over a year ago, even ineffective he was the better choice.]
JM–
Well thought out and presented, as always. I think if Obama had spent a term or two in the Senate or (much better in my opinion) as governor of Illinois, he would have been better prepared for the massive challenges that awaited him in January of 2009 at the White House.
A great speaker, a great story, an African-American in the White House at last, a brilliant mind, good intentions. . . but way too thin a resume. Reminds me of the freshman who leaves college too soon to join the NBA or NFL, and who never achieves his potential.
Our political system often isn’t that good at getting the best person for the job, at whatever level. (or is it actually we, the voters?).
Like a friend of mine is fond of saying, “The U.S. has the worst system of government in the world. . . except for all the other systems.”
Friday, January 29, 2010
To: California Friends & Supporters
From: Gary L. Bauer
Stop Sacramento’s Spending!
America is in the middle of a fiscal nightmare. Families and small business owners are cutting their budgets to the bone. Of course, I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know. California is ground zero in the country’s fiscal crisis, and many states and cities are on the brink. There are many problems contributing to this crisis, but one stands out: Government spending, especially spending driven by public employee unions.
Just how bad is it? Well, it’s literally bankrupting local communities. For example, the city of Vallejo desperately tried to renegotiate contracts with the city’s public employee unions. After two years of talks with no concessions from the unions, the Vallejo City Council voted 7-to-0 to declare bankruptcy. Why? According to the San Francisco Chronicle, “Vallejo spends 74 percent of its … general fund budget on public safety salaries” as a result of “generous contracts …struck in the 1970s.”
That was in 2008, and Vallejo is just one California city of 117,000 people. Today, the entire state is in jeopardy of going bankrupt with a $20 billion deficit. And let’s face the facts: Deficit spending today means tax hikes tomorrow. If we don’t get serious about spending, we will face a crushing tax burden that will dramatically reduce our standard of living in future years.
The good news is that concerned taxpayers of the Golden State are taking action to restore common sense to Sacramento through the Citizen Power Campaign. Their goal is to prevent public employee unions from spending your taxpayer dollars to promote their Big Government, high tax agenda.
Union political spending might not be the first thing that comes to mind when you think of the fiscal insanity in Sacramento. And you’d be right to blame the politicians. But who is pulling their strings and filling their campaign coffers or threatening their reelection?
It might surprise you to learn just how much influence the public employee unions really have. Breaking their stranglehold on Sacramento is an essential first step toward restoring common sense to the budget and getting California’s fiscal house in order.
It’s time to take the power away from the union bosses and give it back to the citizens of California! And that’s exactly what the Citizen Power Campaign will do!
But to succeed they need your help collecting one million signatures to get the Citizen Power Initiative on the November ballot. To learn more, please visit http://www.UnplugThePoliticalMachine.org.
Please take action today. Click here to download a petition now!
* * * * *
Please feel free to share this report with family and friends.
If you are interested in receiving Mr. Bauer’s daily report by e-mail, please visit SIGN UP FOR GARY BAUER’S “END OF DAY REPORT”.
To be removed from Gary Bauer’s End of Day distribution list, please reply to this message with “Remove” in the subject line.
If you would like to support our work, please click on the following link: Support CWF or you may mail contributions to the following address:
Campaign for Working Families
2800 Shirlington Road
Suite 930
Arlington, VA 22206
Phone: 703-671-8800 703-671-8800
Fax: 703-671-8899
EMAIL GARY BAUER http://www.unplugthepoliticalmachine.org/
Paid for by Campaign for Working Families and not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.
That was a crock.
Who remembers California’s financial position before passing Prop 13?
Right. It wasn’t this bad. We had some of the highest per pupil spending in the country, and also had the best grades. We had a public higher education system that was the envy of every state.
There was extensive spending in the state on infrastructure. Spending on building freeways that connected and criss-crossed the state, that created high-paying steady employment.
Then a few very wealthy land-owners of commercial business property met with a guy named Howard Jarvis. Downtown LA, SF and even San Diego were starting to see more vacancies as rents rose in commercial buildings. In order to keep their margins the commercial real estate properties were having to increase rents to match the ever increasing tax burden on their increasing property values. If there was just some way to get the government to stop taxing these properties at their actual valuation.
Well, you would never be able to sell the idea to the people that they should reduce the taxes paid by these wealthy individuals and corporations, but what if you could highlight something that they would fear. Being tied to a fixed income and having your residential taxes increased. What if it went up so much that you were forced from your home, onto the streets. By the mean evil taxman.
So, they sold the people the fear of the evil taxman taking away their residence. Jarvis could have “protected” against that by making Prop 13 specific to residential property, but the ballot measure wasn’t being written and paid for by residential property owners, so it was made very broad and covered all property, regardless of type.
And after the fearful people passed Prop 13 they rejoiced that they had protected themselves from the evil taxman coming and taking away their property when they finally ended up on a fixed income… at the cost of having the funds to continue to pay for infrastructure, education and other services that were paid by those tax dollars.
And the people who funded Prop 13? They all went on to raise their rents in those downtown commercial properties, and their thin margins became fat margins. And they were fat and happy.
Today a man who is being paid by others is “telling us” that evil unions are gouging us and causing all our pain. In California the reality is that Howard Jarvis and the big money boys who protected us from the evil taxman are really at the bottom of all the pain we feel. But that truth doesn’t serve someone who wants you to hate and fear the evil unions. Those public servants that include first responders, like the guys and gals that willingly walked into the twin towers to save others knowing that in doing so they risked their own lives. The unions that they belong to, the unions made up of these same people that are willing to risk their lives for us, they are really evil. They are the ones really responsible for this mess. Whata crock of BS.
We should trust one of Ronald Regan’s flacks who started a PAC with the agenda of “dedicated to electing pro-family, anti-abortion and pro-free enterprise candidates to federal and state offices.” Who was one of the signatories on the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) – the guys that promoted the Iraq war based on any reason… Gary who called for regim change in Iraq and believes…
* we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;
* we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;
* we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad; [and]
* we need to accept responsibility for America’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.
and to do all that while NOT increasing taxes on the wealthy (shades of Howard Jarvis – using FEAR to motivate the little people to do someone wealthy’s bidding).
Actually, re-writing Prop 13 to not include commercial property would be a good first step. Then getting rid of the crappy other propositions we put in place that create gridlock and allow a minority to derail anything from moving forward that would create a fiscally sound budget. In fact, getting rid of most of the BS propositions that Gary Bauer and people like him have sold the people using fear and half-truths would in fact most likely go a long way to making California the great state it was before people like him started using fear to get people like us to vote against our best long term interests.