Ted Kennedy: Then and Now

Ted Kennedy is once again in the news. The liberal media is going to town with the image of Kennedy rising from his sick bed to promote Obama’s health care plan. NewsBusters.org includes quotes from two different reporters:

World News anchor Dan Harris highlighted how “Kennedy is using his own battle against brain cancer to make an emotional pitch for health care reform” and NBC reporter Mike Viqueira touted: “Today, another dramatic push, this time from an ailing Ted Kennedy, absent from Washington but appearing on the cover of Newsweek and writing: ‘This is the cause of my life. We will have decent, quality health care as a fundamental right and not just a privilege’.”

Oh yes, that’s Teddy Kennedy, champion of the sick, putting aside his own illness to fight for someone else’s right for help. That is unless that someone is trapped inside of a submerged car, then he’ll simply walk away letting her die alone, waiting until the next morning to call for help.

Speaking of that, did you know that the 40th anniversary of the events at Chappaquiddick occurred over the weekend? What, no one in the media cared to put that on the news? Gee, how surprising…

Kennedy, like so many liberals, professes love and concern for the masses but if that help impinges on him in any way then he’ll just walk away without a backwards glance. He needs, no he in fact demands, that someone else takes care of those pesky little details, like a dead body back then or paying the trillions today. Plus it is always easier to “make an emotional pitch” for a group of unknown people than to have to deal with one person face to face. The former is more sterile, more in the abstract then the reality of dealing with a real person (dead or alive).

Since there will be no “emotional pitch” from Kennedy than I will step in and ask that after everyone say a prayer for Mary Jo Kopechne and her family, 40 years after Kennedy left her to die in his submerged car that he had drunkenly drove off a bridge. And I can’t help but wonder if once again Kennedy is going to leave us trapped in a smashed up car with rising water around us, this time in the guise of health care in which we’ll drown in trillions of dollars in debt if it is passed.

The Truth on Obama's Health Care Plan

Remember when Bill Clinton was trying to avoid lying by asking the court to “define the word ‘is’”? Well, the current President is just as much of a slick lawyer except instead of twisting words to avoid acknowledging an affair this President is parsing his words in order to mislead the American public about his health care bill. And I don’t mean he is less than truthful about some obscure part of it but he is trying to fool us about the primary intent of this bill; to socialize medicine by bankrupting private insurance and replacing it with government run insurance, doctors, hospitals and drugs.

I always thought that something about this health care plan smelled badly but I didn’t have any evidence until I stumbled upon a blog by NewsBusters in which they were discussing an article by Investors Daily Business (IDB) http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2009/07/16/ibd-individual-private-health-insurance-illegal-under-house-bill. You see IDB did something quite outrageous, they actually read the entire 1000+ page health care bill, something which I doubt any of the lawmakers currently discussing and voting on the issue have done. And within those pages is a total contradiction to what Obama and the Democrats have been promising.

Here is what President Obama recently said in a major speech to the AMA about his health care bill, “…If you like what you're getting, keep it. Nobody is forcing you to shift. But if you're not, this gives you some new options. And I believe one of these options needs to be a public option that will give people a broader range of choices and inject competition into the health care market so that force -- so that we can force waste out of the system and keep the insurance companies honest…”

This is basically what everyone has told us; those with insurance can keep what they have and those without can choose between public or private insurance options. In fact, Obama takes head on the accusation that private insurance will eventually disappear; “So when you hear the naysayers claim that I'm trying to bring about government-run health care, know this: They're not telling the truth.”

But when reading the health care bill, IBD came across a section titled “Protecting the Choice To Keep Current Coverage” on page 16 which stated: "Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of the year the legislation becomes law”.

This is written in typical misleading legalize and I had to read it a few times before I realized what it was saying: Private health insurance companies will not be allowed to enroll anyone new after the bill becomes law. Wow. Take a moment and let the enormity of that sentence sink in. So yes, people can keep their private insurance. But if you were uninsured you won’t be able to enroll in a private insurance company; you would be forced to use the government insurance plan, whatever that might be. And if you are already insured but you like another private insurance plan better, too bad, you can’t have it.

So who is the liar Mr. President? This bill will kill private insurance companies for how can any private insurance company survive without new customers? In contrast to what is being promised, this bill will force the uninsured into a public plan. Although I carefully reread what Obama said and I realize that he never actually stated that the uninsured could get private insurance: “…this gives you some new options. And I believe one of these options needs to be a public option…” Oh yes, he is a lawyer carefully parsing his sentences to sound one way yet actually mean the exact opposite.

And where he said that people are not telling the truth when they say that he is trying to bring about government health care? I can see where a slick lawyer might argue that this is correct, that Obama isn’t trying to bring about government health care – he is succeeding in doing it!

Perhaps this is the key to that teleprompter. Everything that Obama says is a carefully crafted lie or misdirection. He is a master at telling the public what they want to hear while hiding his true intentions. Luckily a few people, including some from his own party and even a couple of journalists are beginning to question his words, his motives and his goals. In fact Obama just might have gone too far with this new health care bill. We need more folks like IBD and NewsBusters to dig into the true intent of the health care bill and then to let the public know that it isn’t what they say it is. President Obama will again address the nation on this topic so listen carefully to what he says and what he omits. And if it smells bad then it probably really does stink.

Time to Fire Bad Employees

The federal story of security guards sleeping, texting or doing their job poorly seems to be typical of what we’ve been hearing lately. A train crashed? Subway problem? Security breaches? Odds are that it was because of an employee error. We are even hearing that the manager of the Disney World monorail was off site – at the local Perkins pancake restaurant literally phoning in his job.

The fact that some employees are slacking off is not unusual. It happens. What is appalling is that they are still employed. Think about it. This is an employers market as the unemployment rate is closing in to 10%. Now is the time for employers to fire bad employees as there would be a long line of people who would love to take their place.

I never understood or could tolerate slackers at work. The ones who spent half the morning talking about what they did the night before or cooking and eating breakfast or even putting on their makeup and curling the hair. Then they while away the work hours on the internet, or on the phone, or running errands. And of course they are always gone before the minute hand gets to five o’clock. You would think, though, in today’s environment of high unemployment that these folks would put in a little bit of effort for fear that they might lose their jobs. But nope, they continue to go through their day doing as little as possible.

Case in point was my cable guy who stopped by on Saturday to replace my cable box. The cable man started to grumble that he had seven jobs to do that morning when the rules were you shouldn’t have more than three or four in a four hour period. Having just started this blog I was surprised to hear him echo what I had recently written. For he complained that most of the other workers barely completed three jobs in as many hours whereas he does nearly twice as many. And because he is faster then management gives him the jobs that the slackers weren’t going to get around to doing because they were so slow.

Ah yes. The eternal complaint of the efficient worker – if you show you can do something faster than others than they simply pile on more work and end up expecting more from you than from everybody else. And heaven forbid if the good employee should question aloud if they can get all this extra work done. Because that would then elicit a remark that use to really anger me. For if you wonder if you can get the heavy load of work completed then someone will invariably say what are you worrying about, of course you will finish it because you have always gotten it done before. As if somehow you magically do the work without taking into account the 12 hour days and six or seven days you have to work in order to complete the job by the deadline. And then management wonders why they can’t hold on to good employees.

Anyway, there is no excuse for companies to be riddled with slackers, inefficient workers or incompetent employees today. Not when there are dozens of unemployed people who would be delighted to have the job and would actually work hard. Now I don’t usually complain to management when I am faced with a bad employee but I think I just might start to do so. If someone is so blasé that they continue to provide poor customer service or do a job inaccurately then that person should be given a wake up call. Tell their manager when you get bad service. And if the employee is ultimately let go – oh well. At worst you are providing a job opportunity to someone who will appreciate having that job and at best you just might prevent another deadly accident.

Short Retort

I just watched an interview on Fox with Colin Hanna, President of Let Freedom Ring. He was stating that they have developed a Pledge for Congressmen and women to sign in which they pledged to read the Health Care Reform bill. Hmmm.. Sound familiar? My Fourth of July blog discussed the exact same thing although I think they should read every bill.

If you agree that your Senator and Representatives should actually read the Health Care Reform bill, the most important bill to hit Congress in decades then go to Let Freedom Ring and download a copy of their Pledge and send it to your Congressmen and women. http://www.letfreedomringusa.com/pledge-to-read

No Taxation Without Cogitation!

On this 4th of July weekend I would like to propose a revised version of the slogan that helped to rally the continental troops into fighting and defeating the English. Back then our forefathers complained that they had no vote in whether or not they would be taxed. Instead the King imposed all taxes. So the great slogan of No taxation without representation was born, thus helping to create the United States of America

Today, I propose a slight change to this slogan to reflect our current situation. My revised slogan is No taxation without cogitation. Aren’t familiar with cogitation? It’s a great old fashioned word that means concerted thought or reflection. So what I want my representatives to do is simply read all proposed bills, think about it and then vote. Sounds reasonable, right? And yet, from the first Congress there have been a few Senators and Representatives who would never bother to read a bill but would vote the party line. However starting this year, major bills are being passed in which none of our Congressmen or women are bothering to read what they are voting on much less cogitating on how much it would cost us, the citizens, when the bill is implemented.

This new trend started with the Stimulus Bill which grew into a 1000+ page bill which no one could have read in its entirety in the brief time between publishing the bill and voting on it. This massive bill, which would spend over $787 billion of our money, was passed by 246 people (ok mainly democrats) in the House and by 60 Senators. To their credit, our government officials were told that they had to vote on this bill immediately in order to resuscitate a dying economy. And yes, in January 2009 the news was grim with increasing unemployment and major companies failing left and right. We also had a new and exciting administration and so it is understandable if a vote on this bill was seen as yet one more support of Obama.

For all of these reasons, this massive bill, which few people read, was pushed through Congress on record time in order to save our economy. Now it is six months later yet less than a tenth of the money has been spent. OK, I'm all for saving the money if the economy is rebounding. Oh wait. The economy is worse than the start of the year. In fact, Obama’s economic team had said that if the bill was passed then the 7.2% unemployment rate at the time of the vote would probably peak at 8%. Oops. They just announced that our current unemployment rate is 9.1%. And that is with the $787 billion in stimulus aid! Seems to me that maybe somebody ought to finally read all 1000+ pages to see just what that money is earmarked for and how it is supposed to be stimulating our economy. All it has stimulated so far is the unemployment rate.

But did Congress learn? No. In fact last week the House of Representatives did it again. They passed another long bill regarding a new concept of Cap and Trade. From what I understand it is basically a taxing platform to raise money from corporations and citizens to spend on “green” environmental stuff. Even putting aside the ongoing arguments (and yes Senator Gore, people are still debating global warming as they should) there is still the unconscionable fact that our Congressmen and women once again voted on a bill which they didn’t read.

This time it was a complete farce. When Representatives complained that they didn’t even have a copy of the bill Speaker Nancy Pelosi told them that there was one copy at the podium. That’s it; one copy for over 400 people to share and read. Only problem is that even that “final” copy was missing the 300 pages of addendums added at 3am of the day of the vote. Denying Representatives a chance to even read a bill is a complete abuse of her power. Plus it is one thing to be loyal to a new administration but to blindly pass massive bills unread which would change the foundation of this country and heavily tax citizens in an effort to redistribute wealth is unethical and disgusting.

Has it reached the point where we need to demand that if a bill requires new or increased taxes then our Senators and Representatives who vote on it must sign a statement indicating that they read it in full? They would then be held accountable for what was in that bill and what they approved with their vote. If they were forced to read it and to be accountable then they just might produce reasonable bills without pages and pages of rediculous earmarks.

Plus isn’t accountability what Obama promised us? Wasn’t his administration supposed to be one of both accountability and transparency? And yet Congressmen can’t even get their own copy of a bill and when they do the bills are so voluminous that no one can read it in time for the vote. Plus there is the whole issue of the unheard of speed in which these bills are being forced through committees and onto the floor with little to no discussions and not even time to read it even if you had your own copy and wanted to read it.

It is time to say Stop! We must demand No taxation without cogitation! We and our children and grandchildren will be paying for the taxes hidden in these unread bills and we can’t let this go on. Beginning with the upcoming Senate vote on the Cap and Trade we must demand that our Senators at least read the bill before they vote on it.

And how sad that we even have to tell our Senators and Representatives to read something before voting on it. But thanks to Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid who are trying to jam bills with massive taxing and redistribution of our country's wealth down our throats then we must demand of our Congressmen and women to read the bill and think about its implications before voting on it.

So join me in shouting No taxation without cogitation and maybe someday there might actually be a vote by people who have read the bill, understand its tax implication and had a lively intelligent discussion about it. Now wouldn't that be nice....

Old Time Religion

Chris Matthews just asked on his Sunday morning show what many liberals have been asking since Wednesday’s press conference with the South Carolina governor. In a very smarmy way and with a gleeful laugh he asked: “Have Republicans finally embarrassed themselves out of calling themselves the family value party?” I flip to Face the Nation and later to This Week and sure enough the first topic is about the SC scandal. And again the hosts question what this will do to the image of the family value party and one of them asks if the party should shift their emphasis away from values and these social issues. If I had watched Meet the Press I am sure they probably asked the same thing. You get the feeling that the liberals are having a field day exploiting the SC governor’s adultery and its impact on the Republican’s stance on family values.

How boring. They sound like a bunch of smug teenagers who just discovered that their parents and the rest of the people in church don’t always follow the 10 commandments or Jesus’ teachings. Duh. Guess what? People are human and don’t always do what is right. I have a friend who refuses to go to church because as a teenager he realized that the congregation wasn’t perfect. But just like the liberals he misses the whole point. It is because people are imperfect that they turn to the church.

For Christians it is pretty much a stacked deck against you. Even the most saintly among us would probably be breaking many of the 10 commandments or the 7 deadly sins. I don’t want to get tangled up in theological debates but think how ludicrous it is to say that it is hypocritical for a sinner to go to church. To continue doing wrong is hypocritical but to continue to go to church is where this person belongs.

This same idea should be applied to the Republican Party and its embracement of family values and morals. They might not always follow these values and even have some members blatantly disregard them but it doesn’t mean they should turn their backs on family values. What I don’t understand is if you aren’t for family values and morals then what are you for? Is that the real purpose of the mainstream media? To tear down these values so that we become an anything goes kind of country with no moral compass to help show the way?

I also wonder if many liberals identify family values and morals with Christian/Judaism teachings. Where else would these values come from? Is this what bothers liberals so much? That Republicans do cling to their religion and believe that their faith is what provides their guidelines of values and morals? Is the hidden agenda of the liberals to ridicule churches and religion? You can’t help but wonder if liberals simply despise Christians and Jews because they believe in something to help them in their lives other than government. Hmmm, wasn’t that the aim of communism?; To take away religion and replace it with dependency of government?

There is also the “if you can’t beat them, join them” effort of the liberals. For example, I recently heard on the news that atheism is now considered a religion. That’s right. I guess if you can’t get rid of religion then twist it into something unrecognizable. In fact google Atheist Church and you’ll find a lot of entries including The First Church of Atheism. How utterly perverted is that?

Although Atheist Churches are a fairly new concept before these monstrosities there was the Unitarian Church. The Unitarian Church’s website states that “Unitarian Universalists include people who identify as Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Pagans, Atheists, Agnostics, Humanists, and others.” Isn't there a saying that if you believe in everything then you believe in nothing? Sounds like it would apply here. The website then has a page specifically for Pagans which states “There are many Wiccans, witches and Pagans and people with earth based spiritulaties who lead and worship in Unitarian congregations”. Excuse me? It sounds like the start of a bad joke – a Catholic, a Jew and a Witch walked into a bar….

So is this what the liberals are trying to do to the Republican’s morals and family values? To twist these ideas into something they are not just as they twisted the idea of church and faith into something grotesque? It has become commonplace for liberals to blame religion for the problems in the world. And they are quick to point out all of the wars caused by religion. But can you imagine the anarchy and chaos if there was no religion, no morals, no family values? This country was founded by men of Christian/Judaism beliefs, what if we had become a nation of men who have no morals or family values and therefore have no comprehension of what is evil? There is a word for a man like that – sociopath. Is that what liberals want?

The bottom line is that Republicans must continue to stand for their family values and morals. Will others faulter and fall along the way? Of course. People will fall in love outside of their marriage, teenage girls will get pregnant, others will hate or covet or do any of a myriad of sins. But this doesn't mean we turn aside from our values. Instead we must always try to live up to our morals and family values for this is a struggle as old as religion itself.

Doomed Iranian Students

In 1989 there were two revolutions – one in Tianamen Square which failed miserably and one in Eastern Europe that resulted in the demise of the Berlin Wall and the Communist regime in Russia. Why did one work and one failed? I have two theories about that. Based on my theories I predict that the newest Iranian revolution will be crushed perhaps even brutally with extreme force and imprisonment of the most radical revolutionaries.

History tells us that almost every revolution begins with the students. Young people who rebel against almost anything anyway band together to revolt against society, against the harsh rules, against the tyrannical regime ruling their country. But this revolt is almost always doomed if it remains a student rebellion, if no one else joins in to help them. So my first theory is that successful revolutions are dependent upon the involvement of the older generations. If the fathers of these students stand on the side lines, worrying about their sons and daughters, but not participating, then there is little hope for the success of the chanting students. On the other hand, if men and women of all ages participate, as they did in the American Revolution than it has a greater chance of success.

I was glued to the TV watching the Tianamen Square revolt. I had never seen anything like this and was thrilled that these students would rise up against the crushing Communist government ruled by ancient old men. I thought of course this would make a difference. This rebellion just had to initiate needed changes in China. But then the soldiers and tanks moved in. I had cried when these students built their own Statue of Liberty, a touching heartfelt salute to my country. Days later, I cried again when I watched the military destroy this symbol of their hope for democracy. This was as upsetting to me as when I watched that lone student standing against those tanks. As quickly as the students had assembled and built their tent city it was demolished and the students imprisoned or in hiding. I finally realized that real life is not like the political thrillers I read. The world could be hard and cruel and the good guy doesn’t necessarily win.

Shortly after this happened, we witnessed the collapse of the Berlin Wall and later, Communist reign in Russia. So why did this work whereas the Tianamen Square revolt didn’t? I know that history books are filled with the facts and figures regarding both rebellions. But in a nut shell my first theory is that the Chinese rebellion was primarily led by students. On the other hand, one of the key figures in the downfall of Russia was a Polish union leader, Lech Walesa. Walesa was no starry eyed student but an experienced determined man who led his union and then his country into a coupe against the Russian leaders. Middle class men and women worked hand in hand with the students to revolt against the Communist regime.

Perhaps this is giving too much credit to my country, yet I can’t help but believe that America’s reaction was also a determining factor in another country’s successful rebellion. President Reagan stood firm against communism, going so far as to call Russia, the “evil empire” and loudly proclaiming that “Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall”. Wow. Between Reagan, Prime Minister Thatcher and the Pope there was constant pressure against Russia.

Compare Reagan’s emphatic statements and support of Walesa and all the rebels to the statements of President George H.W. Bush in 1989 about the China rebellion. In a memo declassified ten years later we read that Bush 41 said while he deplored the violence in China he “believes deeply that a solid relationship” between the countries was in the interest of world peace. Oh yeah, that is telling them.

Unlike his father, Bush 43 followed in the footsteps of Reagan by stating which countries were enemies to the US. He was never shy about using strong language when discussing Iran or North Korea. In return he was despised by these countries and I also believe he was actually feared. They saw him as a loose cannon, a wild cowboy who might shoot first and ask questions later. Yet I doubt if North Korea would have threatened to bomb Hawaii if Bush were still president. But more on this in a later blog.

OK, here we are today with a new revolution in Iran. Students are outraged at the recent election believing that it was rigged. They are probably correct but unfortunately based on my two theories this rebellion doesn’t stand a chance. As far as I can tell the revolt is still primarily driven by students. You simply don’t hear about older men participating in it. And now, the Guardian Council, Iran’s top electoral council, announced today that there was no fraud in the election. Yeah right. For those who disagree, the feared Revolutionary Guard is threatening to use violence to quash the rebellion.

As for American involvement, Obama’s tepid response is right up there with Bush 41’s lack of support. I sure miss Reagan who had no qualms about supporting groups that tried to replace despotic regimes with freedom and democracy. But Obama isn’t able to do that. Then again it is probably ludicrous to hope that Obama would support fledgling democracy abroad when our president isn’t able to support democracy in our own country.

So I believe that those Iranian students are doomed. Sooner or later the soldiers will silence this rebellion and the old leaders will continue to rule. I bet that Obama will then be one of the first to call and to set up a face to face meeting with the “re-elected” Iranian president Ahmadinejad before the blood of the students have even been scrubbed away from the streets.

Short Retort

There is a lot of talk about health care bills. The Senate and the House each have their own version of a bill that would provide health care for everyone. They are massive bills filled with pages and pages of legalese and bureaucratic jargon which no one ever reads. Yet these Washington politicians and their mainstream media side kicks bombard us with stories and lectures on how wonderful these health care bills are. But no one mentions one small detail; not everyone is covered in the new health care plans. There is one group who will be exempt from following this "wonderful" new health care plan - the politicians themselves! You have to wonder... why aren't the Senators and Congressmen and women who are writing and designing the new health care system going to be forced to use it just like everyone else? If the proposed new health care system not good enough for Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi and all the rest of the politicians then why should we be forced to use it?

Stage Struck President

The Phantom of the Opera is one of the best, if not the best, show ever to hit Broadway. To prepare for this role of a lifetime, the lead actor spends two hours each day in makeup. And yet, the Phantom is only on stage for 40 minutes. That’s all. If you’ve ever seen the show you would have sworn that the Phantom appeared for more than 40 minutes of the two and half hour show. That is the mystic of the Phantom that even when he isn’t on stage you are still aware of him, his power, his feelings, his desires.

Obama needs to take a few lessons from the Phantom for this President seems to be on stage 24-7. He’s always delivering speeches, holding town hall meetings or giving in-depth interviews to the mainstream media. Every night we see him espousing on the crisis of the day. And his exposure isn’t limited to just here in the states. He’s already taken a number of trips where once again he can be found reading from that teleprompter as he apologizes for our behavior, talks about things he really doesn’t understand and telling other nations how to behave.

Unlike past Presidents, Obama seems unable to delegate tasks or speeches to the people working for him. OK, I can understand why he doesn’t want Biden talking for him but he has hired other experienced professional staffers. So why not let them do their jobs? Is he that insecure that he must constantly be in the limelight? Maybe, but I think it is also the sign of someone who has no experience as a manager. Obama has never run a business, oversaw staff, been required to meet a budget, produced a product or made a profit. A president needs to be able to do all of these things. Instead we have a man who is a politician/professor with no managerial experience at all. And if, like Reagan, you aren’t a manager then you need to delegate, which Reagan did, but which Obama seems incapable of doing.

Obama is a great politician and he probably was a good law professor but he is clueless when it comes to running a business, much less our country. A review of his first few months clearly shows that he has acted more like a professor or politician and not like the President of the US of A. For example, the most important aspect to being a good politician or professor is the ability to get money; the former from the public and the latter in grants (also ultimately from the public).Being a good politician/professor the first thing Obama has done is to grab money, lots and lots of money, with few strings attached. What happens with this money is secondary. Obama can’t be bothered with those details. He only knows how to reach out and take as much money as possible.

Another important part of being either a politician or a professor is to be published. And Obama has become a prolific author. Guess how many books Amazon.com shows have been released with Obama as the “author” since the first of the year? Would you believe there are ten books! This country is falling apart, people are hurting yet still Obama found time to produce nine books with a tenth due out in September. Even if it is compilation of his speeches or updating past books, this man is such a perfectionist, never speaking unless he has that teleprompter, he had to have had spent some time reviewing each of his ten books. But our president should be running the country, not writing books! The public should be outraged at this waste of presidential time when there are so many crisis and problems he should be concentrating on instead of books! This isn’t how a president should act!

It is rare to find either a politician or a professor who likes big business or even small business. They despise business managers and owners believing that they pollute the earth, abuse and exploit the little people who work for them and produce useless products. Professors and politicians are always for the little people, yet in private they jeer these workers with their guns and bibles and hold them in utter contempt. They despise the average Joe while at the same time show unending “love” for those who refuse to work and are dependent on the largess of the politician.

Obama is now trying to realize the dreams of every liberal politician and far left professor. He is trying to redistribute the wealth by going after the rich who don’t agree with him and handing their money to the idle poor who voted for him, while destroying the middle class who never have completely swallowed his kool ade. He is also systematically destroying business in America. He has taken over our car industry and our financial industry and is trying to take down energy businesses. Again like any politician or professor, Obama is now telling these industries what the end product should be but with no regard as to how to actually produce those products. Those details are beneath him and that’s what those business people should figure out. As for making a profit, well, business leaders have been too greedy in the past and don’t need to make profits.

The world is a scary place and we need a President not a politician/professor and definitely not a narcistic actor clamoring for more time on stage. The mystic of the Phantom is enhanced by the fact that he is seen in less than half the show. So President Obama needs to back off, to not have constant interviews, give endless speeches or even be seen going out on Saturday night dates. Obama keeps telling us he is President now it is about time he begins to act like one and not like a politician/professor or a stage struck actor. Otherwise we will find one who does.

Czar Takeovers

Ronald Reagan started it with one. Clinton increased it to three and the last president upped it to four. Our current President, however, has gone over the top with 16 and probably more to come. Of course I am talking about Czars. What started out innocently in Reagan’s day with a Drug Czar has become a dark and disturbing trend under this President. It seems that Obama is announcing new Czars all the time and no one seems to care. Yet you should. In fact you should be very very frightened.

One of the latest Czars to be announced is the Pay Czar. According to the Wall Street Journal “The Obama administration plans to appoint a "Special Master for Compensation" to ensure that companies receiving federal bailout funds are abiding by executive-pay guidelines, according to people familiar with the matter.” That doesn’t sound too ominous however later in the same article the WSJ reports that “The government is also pursuing a separate revamping of financial-sector rules that could change industry compensation practices more broadly. For instance, the Federal Reserve is considering rules that would curb banks' ability to pay employees in a way that would threaten the "safety and soundness" of the bank”. Excuse me? Who will decide if the pay is threatening? The government? And notice they now are targeting "employees" and not just the executives!

Forget what you hear on TV. Yes some of the large Banks pay exorbitant amounts to the top tier of executive but that is only a handful. Before all of this, Banks were actually known for handing out great sounding titles but paying low salaries. Now add in the new Pay Czar and his rules which will be applied to all of the employees, not just the very top tier. Can’t you just see some poor teller making less than $25,000 a year being told that she won’t get a raise this year because it would “threaten the safety and soundness of the bank”? No raise this year? Sorry, not management’s fault – blame it on the Pay Czar. Oh yeah, this is going to happen alright.

If the Pay Czar can regulate bank salaries, what industry is next? When will this unelected Czar with unlimited powers start to reach into your pocket and affect your salary? And if not the Pay Czar there is sure to be one of the other 15 Czars who will affect your life, your salary, your expenses and your family. Oh yes, and your computer with one of the latest Czars, the Cyber Czar although not sure how the Cyber Czar differs from the Technology Czar.

How soon before the Cyber/Technology Czars start to control the internet? Will there be a day that I am told that this blog “threatens the safety and soundness” of this country? That perhaps speaking out against the government will be a hate crime or maybe that will fall under the Homeland Security Czar.

Will the Health Czar reach into your home, your life, telling you what doctors you can see and what food you can eat? Hey don’t laugh. They are already doing the latter – controlling what you eat. They got rid of trans fat, whatever that was, and are now discussing taxing unhealthy foods such as soda and candy.

All of these Czars are working for your own good, of course. All because they don’t trust you, the public, to make the right decisions so the Czars will make the decision for you. What foods you can eat. What cars will be available for you to drive. What salary you should earn. Coming soon – what doctor you should see. And on and on and on.

In case you are curious, here is a list of the Czars announced to date. Just reading the titles of these Czars gives me a chill: Drug Czar, Energy and Environment Czar, Homeland Security Czar, Health Czar, Urban Affairs Czar, Economic Czar, Regulatory Czar, Technology Czar, Government Performance Czar, Border Czar, WMD Policy Czar, Intelligence Czar, Car Czar, Great Lakes Czar, Cyber Czar.

In total, these Czars control over $1 trillion. But no one voted for them. No one vetted them. Congress never approved them. They have broad powers. They can make a law, police the law, and determine penalties for not obeying their law. They are all three executive branches in one person, one Czar. And they serve only President Obama. Now are you frightened?