The Absentee President Attacks Congress for Adjourning

President Obama, in his Saturday radio address to the nation, attacked Congress for going AWOL, by adjourning.

He complained of the House of Representatives: “Last week, without much fanfare, members of the House of Representatives banged a gavel, turned out the lights, and pushed home, declaring their work done for now …. If that frustrates you, it should, because their work isn’t finished.”

He also lashed out at the Democratic Senate.

Utterly amazing – the height of political hypocrisy, coming from the President who has been campaigning full time for the past year outside Washington.

He accused Congress of being “more worried about their jobs and paychecks” than their constituents.

That sounds like the President projecting his persona on Congress.

Members of Congress adjourned to campaign for reelection. Apparently the President holds them to a different calendar or standard than his current campaign or his Presidential campaign four years ago when he took off from the Senate for over a year to campaign full time. He continued to collect his Senate salary while campaigning.

The President cares more about his campaign than theirs, including the Democrats. He doesn’t even share fundraising with them. No solidarity with this president.

As a Illinois State Senator he voted “present” 129 times.

President Obama has golfed over 100 times since becoming President. Only the need for reelection has interrupted his torrid golf pace.

President Obama said to Univision last week that he learned you can’t change Washington from the inside.

Therefore, he’s campaigning outside D.C. The President is on a constant campaign swing through Florida, Iowa, Nevada, Ohio, North Carolina, and Virginia except for quickie trips to California and New York to fund raise.

He can’t find time to meet with the Prime Minister of Israel or other foreign leaders next week, at the United Nations General Assembly in New York, but he can appear on the Letterman and Leno shows and the View, and meet with Whoopi Goldberg. That’s for campaign purposes – not the needs of national security or the American people.

He did find time to invite the President of Egypt, a former member of the Islamic Brotherhood governing council, to a meeting.

He can’t find the time or interest to read his daily security briefings while our Ambassador to Libya is killed and the American flag burns around the world.

The House of Representatives has done its job the past two years. It has passed scores of bills, sending them to the Senate, where they die. The Democratic Senators are so scared of voting on a bill when that vote could be used against them, that they don’t take votes. Indeed, the United States Senate has not passed a budget in here years.

The President, who seeks a job for one in November, has proven again in his rhetoric that his is the only one. 

The Endeavour Has Landed: The Symbolism

Houston, we have a problem. The Endeavour Has Landed. How Symbolic!

Man has looked to the moon and stars for millennia, and dreamt of exploring space. The history of man is to explore the farthest stretches  of the earth, to discover, to bring back, and to colonize. From out of Africa to the Universe. It is part of our destiny.

The Space Shuttle Endeavour landed at LAX at 12:53PM on Friday, September 21, 2012. It completed its 26^th and final voyage. From reaching for the stars, it will now be an exhibit at the California Science Museum to delight, educate, and wow future generations on the ground.

The landing, after a 1500’ flyby over Sacramento, the Golden Gate Bridge, the Hollywood sign, three times over the Griffith Observatory, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab in Pasadena, Boeing’s Huntington Beach facility, and breaching the No-Fly Zone over Disneyland, formally closes an era.

We watched the end of an era, the closing of a historical period, as the shuttle flew by on the back of a 747, trailed by two escorting fighter planes., an awesome sight, an inspirational sight, but we all realized it is the end.

The five space shuttles, Atlantis, Challenger, Columbia, Discovery, and Endeavour, completed 135 missions from 1982 - 2011. Two tragedies occurred, with Challenger and Columbia, which is two too many, but accidents and tragedies are to be expected when exploring into the far unknown. Technology always has unknowns until tested.

One of the major issues with the aerospace industry has historically been the “unk unks,” the unknown unknowns. Two tragedies in space and one on the ground for the Americans in space exploration is a fairly safe record.

The Endeavour landing is highly symbolic because NASA has lost the ability to engage in manned space exploration.  It outsources flights to the International Space Station to Russia at $23 million/pop. It’s subcontracting future space efforts to private companies, such as SpaceX.

One of President Obama’s mottos four years ago was “Yes we can.”

Now, it’s “No we can’t. No we won’t.”

President Kennedy proposed landing a man on the moon. Presidents Johnson and Nixon carried through, but subsequent presidents lost interest. No recent president has been a strong advocate of manned space exploration. President Obama asked NASA to investigate the Toyota accident problems, a symbolic grounding.

We stayed up late to watch Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon on July 21, 1969 at 1:17 PST. Henry Rogers, who shared office space with the small law firm I worked for, was in his late 80's. His office wall had a photo on it of Henry riding circuit on a stagecoach in California decades earlier. Watching the moon walk, living the change from stage coach to rocket, was one of the most exciting experiences in his long and distinguished life.

Henry symbolized the meaning of the Moon Walk to Americans. We could do it; Americans could do anything. Then.

Not today.

NASA has become bureaucratic and sclerotic. It is unable to develop a replacement rocket or vehicle for the shuttle, after spending billions of dollars. You can only learn so much on the ground. You only learn so much without being there.

NASA is a symbol of modern America.

The shuttle emerged from Southern California for that is where the genius of aerospace was. The industry was centered in Los Angeles. One in four aerospace workers were in Southern California in highly paid jobs. 15 of the 25 largest aerospace companies were in Southern California, led by Consolidated Vultee (Convair), Douglas, Lockheed, Hughes, Martin, North American, and Northrup.

Southern California was built on Hollywood, oil, and aerospace. World War II, followed by Korea and the Cold War, gave birth to a large aerospace industry from Ventura County to San Diego. Aerospace employed more than entertainment until the 1980’s.

270,100 worked in the aerospace pants in 1970. By 2010 it was down to 91,100, and it’s still dropping. The fall of the Berlin Wall marked the end of the Cold War and prompted the collapse of California’s aerospace plants. The industry quickly lost 200,000 jobs after 1990.

Part of North American Rockwell’s Downey plant, which built the shuttles, is now a studio. Another part was being demolished as the Endeavour flew by. Lockheed stopped manufacturing in 1992 at its famous Burbank plant. A Target is now on the site.

Douglas’ Long Beach plant at its peak in World War II employed 150,000 workers. It employed 80,000 in the 1980’s.  It’s now down to under 3,000 under Boeing’s leadership, producing only the C 17 cargo plane. It will close next year without future orders. The runways though serve as a great field for a Jet Blue hub.

Much of the remaining aerospace industry is located in Palmdale at Plant 42 by Edwards Air Force Base, where Boeing, Lockheed, and Northrup have substantial operations.

One sign of the brilliance of Southern California’s aerospace industry is that much of the drone research and production occurs in the area.

The waiting area at Disney’s California Adventure's Soaring Over California ride is an archive of the Southern California aerospace industry, hence the appropriateness of the fly-over.

Man can dream, and look to the stars, but the closest we will get to it in Southern California is California Adventure, the California Science Center, and the Griffith Observatory.

Whither Egypt

Karnack the Magnificent gazed into his crystal ball and foresaw the future of Egypt is bleak. Ra, the Sun God, is setting on one of the greatest cultural heritages in the world.

The Egyptian people in their glorious 6,000 years of recorded history have experienced at best a nanosecond of democracy.  Pharaohs, The House of Ptolemy, Romans, Byzantines, Persians, Turks, French, British, pashas, khedives, sultans, kings and dictators have ruled Egypt - everyone but the Egyptian people themselves.

The Muslim Brotherhood is currently consolidating political power in Egypt. It controls the legislative and executive branches and is reining in the military.

Its credo is “Allah is our objective; the Quran is our law, the Prophet is our leader, Jihad is our way; and death for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations.” This credo, unlike the professed goals of political parties in western democracies, does not include bettering the material lives of the citizens during their life on earth. Rather, it aspires to the soul, to religious salvation in the next life.

It does not support pluralism, freedom of releigion, or of the press.

The question is what happens when the populace turns on the Muslim Brotherhood because of its failure to improve their lives? What happens when the euphoria lifts and hunger sets in?

The Egyptian economy is sinking fast. Tourism to the Jewel of the Nile has dried up. Energy exports to Israel are at risk. Foreign currency will become a sorely needed commodity.

If history is any guide, The Muslim Brotherhood will not peacefully surrender power. Instead, a ruthless dictatorship of religious intolerance will rule, not immediately, but soon enough. Egypt has already seen anti-Christian riots directed against the Coptic Christian 15% of the population.

The Iranian Revolution witnessed the flight of hundreds of thousands of Persians, both Jewish and Muslim. Quite a few managed to get their assets out of Iran. America is the great beneficiary of these refugees.

.

One assumes that the middle and upper classes in Egypt are at least contemplating emigrating from Egypt, ensuring the loss of a stabilizing middle class. The younger, educated generation, the force of last year’s revolution, will emigrate or sullenly suffer, as in Iran.

The students have been pushed aside, as history consistently shows that in most violent revolutions, the radicals displace the moderates.

That premise is a problem in Egypt because the Muslim Brotherhood is being pushed in turn by the even more religiously conservative Salafis, cousins to the Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia. The Egyptian Revolution is not over, but the odds do not favor democracy.  The Muslim Brotherhood may have to show more intolerance and radical acts to maintain power.

Always remember, they have Allah on their side.

The past week has shown how easy it is to manipulate the Arab Street by demagogues, especially in the name of Allah. A large segment of the Egyptian population hates both Israel and the United States. The temptation to launch a Jihad against Israel, perhaps in concert with Hamas and Hezbollah, may prove irresistible to Egyptian leaders as a means to relieve the domestic pressure cooker.

Egypt deserves better.  

The Romney Tape: Independence or Dependence?

Two conflicting visions of America are colliding in this election cycle- the individual or the state.

The Romney Video, released Monday, presents the issue of the election: The Role of the State versus the Individual.

Every election is for the future. The 2012 election is truly the one. America is on the precipice of abandoning 400 years of self-reliance, individuality, and personal liberty for dependency on the state.

We all know what Governor Romney said at the Florida fundraiser: “There are 47% of the people who will vote for the president, no matter what.  All right, there are 47% who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name it. That’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for the president no matter what…. These are people who pay no income tax.”

He added his job is “not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them to take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”

His self-proclaimed inelegant remarks wove together two separate threads of the modern American state – those who receive benefits from the government, and those who are not paying income taxes.

Democrats are the party of the state, of government. Republicans are the party of the individual and personal liberty.

Americans have been a self-reliant people, relying upon themselves to succeed, going back to the time of the original settlers.

However, slowly but inexorably since the days of the New Deal, Americans have become increasingly dependent upon the federal government for benefits. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security Disability, unemployment, extended unemployment, food stamps, VA benefits, and farm subsidies pour out of Washington.

These government benefits don't include ObamaCare which hasn't fully kicked kick in. The British Health System is the largest employer in England with 1.4 million employees. Once the federal government takes over the 16% of the economy that is health care, the percent of Americans receiving benefits from the government will greatly exceed 50%. There will be no turning back until the system inevitably collapses.

Some commentators derisively make a distinction between the makers and takers in life, but those receiving government benefits may have paid into them, such as social security or been thrust into economic distress through no fault of their own. 16.2% are on social security and 14.9% on Medicare. Many Americans, especially those receiving “temporary” benefits might well want to return to the workforce. Labeling the beneficiaries as takers is therefore grossly unfair.

Economists label though these payments as transfer payments.

The Obama vision of the role of the state versus the individual is incorporated in his campaign’s Julia video (See June 1, 2012 blog) in which Julia is dependent upon President Obama for everything.

President Obama was a community organizer whose role was to obtain favors from the government, and that as an Illinois State Senator he had the power to allocate and distribute government favors. He believes in government. That has been his existence.

The President is not for economic growth. He’s for fairness and redistribution as decided by government.

Today, 49% of all American households have at least one resident receiving government benefits according to the Census bureau, up from 30% in 1980.

Americans receiving food stamps have climbed by 15 million over the past four years to 47 million; one out of every seven Americans is on food stamps. The Department of Agriculture was actually advertising a few months ago for Americans to sign up for food stamps.

A Tax Policy Center study shows 46.6% of Americans do not pay income taxes; hence the assertion that 47% do not pay taxes. One of the sayings about taxes is “Don’t raise my taxes; raise the other guy’s. Raise the taxes of the one behind the tree.” The non-income taxpayers will often not be the same as those receiving benefits from the government. Nor may they have a sense of entitlement.

A proposal to cut the taxes of the 53% who pay income taxes will not appeal to those not paying taxes. Nor will raising taxes on the 53% offend the 47%. Thus, the Governor’s tax arguments cannot appeal to them.

Several problems exist with these transfer payments. First, they create a culture of dependency. Cutting seniors off Medicare is not a viable political option, witness the backlash in France, Greece and Spain over austerity.

Americans understand that private employers can terminate them, but they do not expect the government to cut off benefits to them or lay them off.

Second, these payments are not being covered by savings or revenues, but $1.5 trillion in annual borrowings. The benefits are unsustainable.

Third, as the public sector grows, it can no longer be sustained or supported by the private sector. At some point it will suck the economic life out of the private sector, and head to collapse, such as Greece and Spain.

Fourth, the government is notoriously inefficient and costly in the delivery of services, often staffed with excessive staffing and salaries, and subject to fraudulent claims.

Independence or dependency – Do Americans want to be dependent on government or themselves? That’s what this election is about.

Governor Romney may be beginning to understand the theme. He told reporters Monday night that his comments addressed “a question about direction for the country – Do you believe in a government-centered society that provides more and more benefits? Or do you believe instead in a free enterprise society where people are free to pursue their dreams?”

He followed up Tuesday with Neil Cavuto of Fox News: “The President’s view is one of a larger government. I disagree. I think a society based on a government-centered nation, where the government pays a larger and larger role, redistributes money, that’s the wrong course for America.”

He explained “The right course for America is to create wealth, create wealth …. Not to redistribute wealth.”

Then he said it “This is a decision about the course of America – where we are going to head.”

This election is for the future of the country.

The defining question is: Does Governor Romney understand this reality? Now that his own words have been used against him, has he found, truly found, his theme for the remainder of the campaign?

Questions From Benghazi, Bangladesh, Beirut, Cairo, Et Al

Questions, questions, questions in the “Fog of War” in the War Against Terror.

Osama Bin-Laden may be dead, but is Al Qaeda?

Is this the reward for President Obama’s policy of appeasement, apology, kowtowing, and bowing to potentates?

How did the Benghazi attackers know where the Diplomats’ safe house was?

Does the Obama Administration really believe that these “spontaneous” demonstrations and attacks are because of a movie trailer on the internet for 3 months?

Why does United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice, notorious for her absences from the UN early in the Administration, constantly repeat the claim that these are spontaneous demonstrations?

Does the Obama Administration believe we are so gullible as to believe this story?

How long will the Obama Administration stick to its indefensible talking points?

Will an Administration that leaked national security secrets hesitate to play politics with national security?

How long can the Obama Administration deny Islamic terrorist attacks?

How long will the President be in a state of denial?

Does President Obama still listen to the Moslem World?

Will the President ever recognize that his Mideast policy of deposing friends and allies, tolerating enemies of Israel, and appeasing Iran is a failure?

Will President Obama resume reading his daily security briefings?

Or is a fundraiser with Beyoncé more critical to the future of the country?

How do spontaneous demonstrators show up with RPG’s and mortars?

Were some “spontaneous” demonstrators paid to demonstrate?

How many demonstrators in fact were at the non Cairo and Benghazi demonstrations?

Did President Obama, upon being informed of the attacks on the Benghazi Consulate, proceed to gg to sleep being ascetaining the status of Ambassador Stephens?

How easy can the Arab Street be manipulated?

How can any trust be placed on the highly volatile Arab Street?

Why did embassy security forces disappear or dissipate?

Were the Marine guards in Cairo, or elsewhere, unarmed?

Why was embassy security so lax on 9/11?

Why was consulate security essentially non-existent in Benghazi?

If we can’t trust our “allies,” whom can we trust?

Was President Obama right in stating Egypt is not an ally?

Is Egypt going the way of Iran?

If we can’t trust the people we helped liberate, whom can we trust?

Will President Obama ever recognize that Israel is our only true ally in the Mideast?

How do we leave the Mideast if we are dependent upon OPEC Oil and Israel?

Will Congress cut off funding to Egypt?

The British say the U.S. was warned in advance. The U.S. denies it, claiming they had no specific information about a credible threat. Who do you believe?

How much longer will the mainstream media harangue Governor Romney for attacking the appeasement statement of the Cairo Embassy prior to the mob attack on the Embassy?

Does anyone in the Administration understand, that with the exception of the American Revolution, most violent revolutions result in radicals supplanting moderates?

Are Judges Non-Political? In Wisconsin?

Are Wisconsin Judges Non-Political in Wisconsin?

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan spoke to the University of Michigan Law School family on Friday, September 7 on the occasion of the dedication of South Hall, a new law building.

She was asked if the justices are affected by political considerations and controversy in their decisions. She answered with a clear negative.

She said “I don’t think it makes much difference in the way we operate, if at all.” She added “I would never say we go about our lives oblivious to it, but I don’t think it affects at all the way we go about our work.”

She also remarked “There is not a single member of this Court at a single time who has cast a ballot based on ‘Do I like this President or not?’ Do I like this legislation or nor?’ Will this help the Democrats or not?’

Yes, Lady Justice is blind. Justice is blind.

What else can she say?

Judges are human. Their decisions will be based, at least partially, on their existing mindset and backgrounds. For example, lawyer who represents managament will probably vote against unions as a judge and union attorneys will vote against management.

We understand this reality.

We recognize that the current United States Supreme Court is split 5-4 in many contentious cases with the only question being how will Justice Kennedy vote.

One of the most significant powers a President or Governor has is the appointment of judges. These are among the most political acts in government today. Both Democrats and Republicans recognize the power of the nine justices on the Supreme Court. Democrats often recognize that they may have to win from the courts what they cannot achieve through the political process.

President Obama appointed Solicitor General Kagan to the Supreme Court because she is reliably liberal just as President George W. Bush appointed Judge Samuel Alito to the Court as a true conservative appointment. The Republican Party will not tolerate another Justice Souter on the Court.

The debate in Wisconsin over the Collective Bargaining Statute enacted by the Republican Legislature and Governor Walker has given rise to two years of acrimony; fleeing legislators, recall elections of the Governor and legislators, contested judicial retention election.

And then we have two Circuit Judges in Dane County attempting to block the statute. Dane County is the most progressive county in Wisconsin, home to Madison and the University of Wisconsin.

Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) on Friday, March 18, 2011, holding the Legislature procedurally violated the Open Meetings Law in enacting the statute. She promptly skipped town on a vacation.

The decision was destined for the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which had a consistent 4-3 conservative-liberal split. Conservative Judge David Prosser was up for reelection. The unions funded the campaign of JoAnne Kloppenburg, a reliable liberal, to defeat him and turn the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Judge Prosser narrowly won reelection and cast the deciding vote in upholding the statute. No matter how objective Justice Prosser might be, he cannot forget the vicious campaign that was waged against him by the unions.

Judge Sumi’s son, Jacob Sinderbrand, currently leads a political consulting firm “Left Field Strategies.” He previously worked as a lead field manager for the AFL-CIO and as data manager for the SEIU.

The unions were behind the litigation.

Her husband, Carl Sinderbrand, is chair of the Wisconsin advocacy group Clean Environment. He contributed to JoAnne Kloppenberg’s campaign against Judge Prosser.

“Justice” Sumi was not blind. Judges are not normally required to recluse themselves from a case just because their family members might have strong views on a subject, but a wise judicial temperament should have guided her to do so.

One problem when judges seem too politically motivated and biased is that their acts violate a fundamental  precept that “Not only must justice be done, but it must appear to be done.”

Dane County Circuit Judge Juan Colas last Friday ruled almost the entire statute unconstitutional under both the United States and Wisconsin constitutions. His 27 page opinion held the Act violated the Free Speech and Association Clauses of the constitutions and treated different classes of workers differently and unequally.

Unless there is a change in the composition of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, his decision will be overturned on a reliable 4-3 vote.

Just as a sidelight, the Wisconsin State Bar awarded Judge Sumi “Judge of the year,” quite an honor for a judge whose decision was reversed.

Has Concord, Massachusetts, the Cradle of Democracy, Lost Its Way in Banning Single Serving Plastic Water Bottles.?

Has Concord, Massachusetts Lost Its Way in Banning Liquid Plastic Water Bottles?

Lexington and Concord, two fabled cities from the early days of the American Revolution.
The Minutemen assembled to smite the British Redcoats in the fight to throw off the British yoke and acquire freedom.

The voters of Concord at a town meeting voted on April 25, 2012 approved Article 32, which banned the sale of single serving plastic water bottles of one liter or less in size.

The  ban takes effect on January 1, 2013. The first offense will result in a warning, the second in a $25 fine, and the third and more a $50 fine. It was approved on a 403-364 vote. A total of 767 voters in a town of  17,688 residents in the 2010 census made the decision.

The ordinance contains two exceptions. The first is in times of emergency, and the second grants the power to the Council to suspend the ordinance if the cost of implementing or enforcing becomes unreasonable.

Jane Hill, a 84 year old grandmother of 6, fought for two years to enact the ban. She told the Boston Herald that she was motivated by environmental concerns and that businesses could recoup their losses by selling reusable bottles, which could be refilled from the tap. The contention is that such a ban will cut down pollution and limit exposure to toxic chemicals.

Concord became the first city, town, village, or state to ban plastic water bottles. Is Concord, the so-called "Cradle of Democracy," leading a second revolution or simply acting out of misguided naïveté?

By limiting the proscription to water, it excludes sparkling water, juice bottles, Gatorade, canned sodas, Red  Mountain, Mountain Dew, indeed, any artificially sugared, sweetened, or flavored beverage, all of which are more fattening than plain water.

Second, while it bans the sale of these water bottles, it does not ban their  possession. Thus, any Concord resident can purchase these waters from merchants in surrounding communities. These merchants are positively salivating over the sale of water. Get your Poland Springs in Acton, Bedford, Carlisle, Lincoln, Maynard, or Sudbury, the towns surrounding Concord. Or travel to a Costco or Sams Club to stock up.

Just carry your plastic water bottle in a brown paper bag, or consume a 24oz. Water.

Concord merchants will take a hit with no meaningful improvement in the environment.

Third, it positively denies freedom of choice as the state now tells us what we cannot purchase good, clean healthful water. If we wanted to drink tap water, we would do so.

You can buy cigarettes in Concord, but not water. That makes no sense. Even the University of California Berkeley refused to remove plastic water bottles from the campus.

Maine tried something just as dumb a couple of decades ago. It banned the sale in the state of the ascetic juice packs, those juice packs loved by parents. The parents could then go to New Hampshire to purchase booze and juice paks. The ban was repealed within three years.

Governor Madeline Kunin of Vermont, a progressive state, tried to enact a ban for environmental reasons on the sale of disposable diapers in the state. That went nowhere.

The Concord act illustrates the petty tyranny of the Nanny State. A few do-gooders believe they know what's best for all of us, and then force their will on all of us.

Occasionally these acts can be reversed through economic or political realities. Clint Eastwood, for example, ran for Mayor of Carmel in 1986  to overturn the ban on the sale or eating ice cream cones on the public streets. The Carmel City Council refused to grant a permit for a nice cream stand. he campaigned on the plank of doing away with the kill-joy mentality. He won overwhelmingly, and to this day you can eat ice cream cones in public in Carmel, California.

Concord is defying common sense and economic reality with this ban. It will not stand the test of time.