Obama’s Hope Built on a Lie
October 17, 2009
When Shepard Fairey created Obama’s ‘Hope’ poster he stole the work of Mannie Garcia, the owner of a small freelance photography company. When confronted by authorities Shepard claimed that he did NOT use Mannie’s photo, but more recently he has admitted to perjury as well as destruction and fabrication of evidence. His lawyers have indicated they can no longer represent him. The irony of the situation? After the AP confronted Shepard about the photo, asking for compensation, Fairey sued the AP. Yes, the guy who stole Mannie Garcia’s work had the gall to sue the AP for asking for compensation. Wow.
At the end of the day, this situation is ironic. Obama’s plan for America requires that property be taken from one group and given to another (and he is going to take the credit). For example, last week Obama announced he would be making a cash payment to senior citizens of $250. This plan will cost $12 billion and is being touted as part of a ’second stimulus’ to create jobs. You can create a boatload of jobs with $12 billion, but if you divide it up and give $250 to each senior you can’t create a single job. The administration is ‘hoping’ that seniors will go out to Best Buy and buy something. We need to start making investments – investments that are worth MORE tomorrow than they cost to build today. Build a building, build a nuclear power plant, built a road – all of these are examples of capital assets that a) create jobs near term and long term and b) will be worth more tomorrow than they are today. Assets appreciate. Cash payments to seniors make the situation worse.
Just as Shepard blamed the victim, Obama blames us – the small business owners who try to create jobs. He calls us ‘fat cats’, ‘whiners’ or unruly teenagers who don’t know what is good for ourselves. I have hope for America – but my hope is not invested in Obama or our government – instead my hope is invested in the people of America.
Good thing we canceled the missile shield
September 25, 2009
Just eight days ago Obama announced that we were not going to build the missile defense shield. The ground based system was to be based in Poland and the Czech Republic. Obama made the decision to cancel the missile shield after reviewing a report suggesting Iran was five years behind on their nuclear missile program. The May 2009 report suggested that Iran’s intercontinental missile capability would be live by 2020, instead of the 2015 the last National Intelligence Estimate reported. When I read the reasoning I thought to myself, “I hope they aren’t wrong.”
This morning we learned that Iran began construction on a secret underground nuclear fuel plant five years ago. The facility is now largely completed and will begin generating nuclear fuel early next year. I guess the NIE report might be a little off. What if Iran is capable of launching an intercontinental missile before 2015? I guess the good news is that our original missile shield wouldn’t have been ready anyway. The bad news is that we won’t be ready until at least 2020 – and the planned shield is a ‘theater shield’ for Europe. The original shield was designed to protect Europe AND the United States. Note in the image below the red area originating in Iran – the flight path of any missile would fly directly over Poland or the Czech Republic – evidently location is important when intercepting nuclear missiles.
So what will Obama do? Will he call the Polish or Czech representatives and ask them if we can go ahead with the shield? I guess that is what he should do, but I suspect he won’t. Iran promises their secret nuclear program is for peaceful medical and energy purposes. Maybe we should just believe them. What do you think?
Where you stand on a issue isn’t as important. . .
September 22, 2009
…as how you would go about solving the issue. My friends on the Right and Left have no problem articulating their positions on the various issues of the day, but they rarely have the same level fluency when it comes to outlining their own plan. Most people take the time to decide which side of an issue they will take, but few actually take the time to really think through how they would propose to solve the issue. I think the process of really dissecting the issue and coming up with a plan to resolve it from your own point of view and based on your own value system is VERY important. At the end of the day you really start to understand where you fit in the political spectrum when you actually start to outline solutions. For example, I have outlined my position and plans for the various issues facing our nation and many of my friends on the Left agree with my solutions. I think this is the way forward for America – for rational people to sit down and come up with reasonable solutions. Why not sit down and outline your ideas and then share them? I spent some time outlining my various plans and thoughts, tell me what you think.
- My plan for health care reform
- My plan for immigration reform
- My plan for tax reform
- My plan for the environment and energy
- My thoughts on the right to keep and bear arms
- My thoughts on capital punishment
- My thoughts on church and state
White House Lying About Iranian Nukes?
September 9, 2009
I seriously doubt it, but it does make a good title. The Obama administration, like the Bush administration before it, is seriously concerned that Iran has the materials necessary to build a nuclear weapon. Today the administration, along with the IAEA, suggested, “Iran is now either very near or in possession already of sufficient low-enriched uranium to provide a nuclear weapon.”
Two questions: a) where are all the stories from the Washington Post and New York Times about the administration using these reports as an excuse to go to war with Iran? and b) what is Obama going to do about it. Sadly the answer to both questions are obvious. First, the media is in the tank for Obama (see Van Jones) and second, just as the Bush administration failed to deal with the Iranian problem – Obama will fail to deal with it as well. At the end of the day, who knows, Iran might be a good steward of nuclear weapons. The Pakistanis haven’t blown anyone up and they are a little crazy. Maybe the Iranians will surprise us all.
Making sure conservatives get the seats. . .
August 31, 2009
Experts are predicting double-digit losses for the Democrats in 2010. Nate Silver, a Democratic analyst who is almost always right predicts that Republicans will win between 20 and 50 seats (40 seats gives the GOP control).
I don’t know if they are right, but assuming they are we need to ensure that conservatives who are willing to fight for their values are elected (and not the sort of Republicans willing to go along to get along). We need something similar to Newt’s Contract with America to help define what this wave of conservatives promise to do with their opportunity. Too often we send Democrats and Republicans to office without a clear set of goals. Instead we get a lot of – “I share your values” “I will fight for your rights” “Yadda, yadda, yadda”.
Lets outline a set of laws we want to see passed. Lets outline the change we want. Lets outline the reform we demand. Then lets find lawmakers who share our values and are willing to enact our legislation. Here are a few plans I would love to see included (edit as you see fit):
- My plan for tax reform
- My plan for health care reform
- My plan for immigration reform
- My plan for the environment and energy
After Newt left the House I felt as though the Republicans lost their way. With control of the House, Senate and White House we managed to get almost nothing accomplished. We didn’t balance the budget. We didn’t solve our energy issues. We didn’t tackle immigration. We didn’t institute tax reform. We might as well have had Democratic control; hell Bill Clinton was a better Republican than George Bush – don’t you think?
Obama Funds Offshore Drilling!
August 18, 2009
Sadly, the drilling won’t benefit U.S. citizens since it will be taking place in Brazil. Confused? The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the U.S. government has signed a $2 billion commitment letter to Petrobras (the state-owned Brazilian oil company) to fund oil exploration in Brazil’s Tupi oil field near Rio. Ouch. WSJ notes, “this corporate foreign aid may strike some readers as odd, given that the U.S. Treasury seems desperate for cash and Petrobras is one of the largest corporations in the Americas.” Here, here. What is wrong with us? Why are we so stupid?
DRILL ‘THERE’ NOW?
Why not take the $2 billion and start building a nuclear reactor in the US? At least it would be a capital improvement my kids could enjoy (since they are going to be paying for it anyway).
Climate Bill Killing Jobs
August 13, 2009
The climate bill is really just a big tax bill for business and according to studies it will cost us two million jobs and reduce our potential for economic growth. If it ever actually reduces CO2 emissions, it does so after 2030 (my reading of the bill suggests it reduces the growth after that date). There is a better solution. Why not focus on a solution that would: a) create millions of new jobs, b) reduce CO2 emissions by orders of magnitude and c) all but eliminate our need to import energy (oil)?
Our leaders need to quit listening to the coal lobby and instead embark on a New Deal-style building program to build a hundred or more nuclear power plants over the next five years. What about all of that coal? Why not ship it to China? They can’t get enough oil and natural gas to power their growing economy – lets ship it to them until they can completely convert to zero emissions energy.
Electric cars will finally make more sense. In a coal powered country (i.e. like America is today), electric cars actually generate more CO2 than traditional gasoline powered cars. Using electricity generated by nuclear power they will truly be zero emission.
Of course we are going to need a few new laws. First, the French figured a few things out that we can learn from. The first thing they figured out was to use the same design for all of 59 of their reactors. Why is that important? Lower cost of construction and operation. In the United States, federal law mandates that each reactor be of a different design. By law our reactors must be custom built, one off designs, that share NO parts with other reactors. The Chinese figured out who to build a reactor in two years, the average U.S. reactor takes twenty. Why? Lawyers. We need a moratorium on lawsuits related to reactors for the next decade – the climate and job crisis require we act fast – we don’t have time to lose.
Obama, Pelosi and Reid need to hear from you. Stop comprimising away our future. Build nuclear plants now!
UPDATE: Interesting article in the WSJ this morning explaining that the creators of Cap-and-Trade (the climate tax working its way through Congress) don’t support the program anymore. Why? They insist it won’t work.
