The race is set.
We know the two major party candidates and the conventions are done - thank you!
Every four years we hold national elections to decide the leadership of the federal goverment - specifically, the executive branch of the national government. Change is always a topic so there is nothing new about change. Elections are always about change.
In 2008 the Democrats have made "change" a major issue. It is the campaign slogan of the Obama/Biden ticket. They use the term loosely to mean shifts in national policy on foreign policy, on the War against Terrorism, on tax policy, on the size and scope of the federal government, and other unknown shifts that will effect our daily lives. McCain/Palin are running on Country First insisting that Washington must return to serving the people first and drop the "politician first" mentality McCain says has infected DC during the past several years. McCain promises to rid our federal budget of "earmarks" - the pork barrel spending that enables the pols to buy votes and remain in office for a lifetime.
Obama selected Joe biden as his running mate. Biden is an old Washington insider having served in Washington since 1972 - ten years longer than McCain. How Biden represents change is a puzzle. Biden may have been selected because of his "foreign policy" experience. To which I ask, what foreign policy experience? In my opinion Biden has consistently been on the wrong side of foreign policy - on the ash heap of history - throughout the 1980s and 1990s. Biden opposed President Reagan's extremely successful policies of the '80s and history proved Reagan correct and Biden et al wrong. According to The National Journal Biden is the third most liberal (read left) US Senator. Obama was rated the most liberal.
McCain selected a little known governor as his VP running mate. Gov Palin of Alaska is unknown outside her state, but her performance at the RNC demonstrated ability, toughness, a sharpness of mind and presence that will fluster Biden and Obama. I think she is a fantastic choice because she is removed from the elities of the extreme coasts which is why she was attacked so savagely by the mainstream media. Why imagine the nerve of McCain to appoint someone the media elites had not vetted and even worse, was not one of their peers. Palin is young, attractive in many ways, an outsider, and appeals to mothers and fathers whereas Biden is older, an insider, who has had two serious medical problems in recent years.
As to the top of the tickets Obama is an unknown quality despite all the attention-superfical in most respects- the mainstream media lavishes on him. There have been no penetrating analysis of his record, his past connections with shady characters, and the people behind the screen pulling the strings. One thing we all know about McCain is his record. He has a long record open to scrutiny - in camparison to Obama who has little or no open record for voters to judge. McCain is a maverick meaning he opposed President Bush and the GOP on many issues unlike Obama who votes lock step with his party leaders. McCain supports the War on Terrorism whereas Obama appears ambivalent about using American power to destroy international terrorism wherever it appears.
The next 60 days will be telling. Which direction will the country go?
More to come.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Friday, September 5, 2008
The Man
(The scene: A bathsuite in a luxury hotel somewhere in America.
A tall skinny man is preparing for another day)
"Man, you look great!" he says to the full length mirror.
"If you were better looking, it would be illegal."
He continued to prep for the coming day; brushing his short black hair, applying a cream to his face after sniffing the fragrance that suddenly filled the spacious suite.
"Top drawer, hot to trot today," he muttered.
He stepped away from the mirror and did a 360 spin, a move he often made on the basketball court.
"Ready for the day, Mocha Man?" he asked.
"Who are you talking to in there|?' a female voice sleepily inquired.
After a lingering look, the tall skinny man disappeared.
(Scene fades into the gilted mirrows)
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Gov Palin
Is she "qualified" to serve as vice president?
Of course, she meets all the nominal requirements just as Senator Obama meets the nominal requirements to serve as president.
Palin has served as governor of Alaska, a mayor of a small town, and other local government posts. Obama served in the Illinois legislature and serves as a US Senator. Palin reformed much of the Alaska government and rid it of corruption. Obama has spent most the past three years running for president. In some peoples' minds running for president qualifies one to be president. I am not making this up. I heard Mort Kondracke say that on a program this week. Kondracke is the ultimate DC Insider who thinks only people with years and years of DC service are qualified to fill DC jobs. Poor Mort!
The media generated noise over McCain's selection of Palin is just that. Noise. The elite salons in DC, in New York, and on the West Coast cannot tolerate the outsider Palin because; (1) She is not one of them, (2) she is from a Red State, (3), she has five kids, one with Down Syndrome and her 17 year old daughter is pregnant (hicks), and (4) McCain did not seek their approval of his selection.
And the media elites, unelected, nonresponsive and biased journalists, will do whatever it takes to knock Gov. Palin from the GOP platform.
Why?
Palin threatens their influence and power in national politics. Palin proves that the media elites are irrelevant in the 21st Century.
If 143 days in the US Senate qualifies Obama to be president, then serving as governor of Alaska surely more than qualifies Palin to serve as VP.
More to come on the media feeding frenzy.
Of course, she meets all the nominal requirements just as Senator Obama meets the nominal requirements to serve as president.
Palin has served as governor of Alaska, a mayor of a small town, and other local government posts. Obama served in the Illinois legislature and serves as a US Senator. Palin reformed much of the Alaska government and rid it of corruption. Obama has spent most the past three years running for president. In some peoples' minds running for president qualifies one to be president. I am not making this up. I heard Mort Kondracke say that on a program this week. Kondracke is the ultimate DC Insider who thinks only people with years and years of DC service are qualified to fill DC jobs. Poor Mort!
The media generated noise over McCain's selection of Palin is just that. Noise. The elite salons in DC, in New York, and on the West Coast cannot tolerate the outsider Palin because; (1) She is not one of them, (2) she is from a Red State, (3), she has five kids, one with Down Syndrome and her 17 year old daughter is pregnant (hicks), and (4) McCain did not seek their approval of his selection.
And the media elites, unelected, nonresponsive and biased journalists, will do whatever it takes to knock Gov. Palin from the GOP platform.
Why?
Palin threatens their influence and power in national politics. Palin proves that the media elites are irrelevant in the 21st Century.
If 143 days in the US Senate qualifies Obama to be president, then serving as governor of Alaska surely more than qualifies Palin to serve as VP.
More to come on the media feeding frenzy.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Energy III
If Senator Harry Reid, the Democrat Majority leader of the US Senate, was serious about energy these days, he would do the following:
1. Force the casinos in Las Vegas to cut their energy costs in half by next month. Imagine how much energy would be saved if the folks in Las Vegas turned off one half the hideous lights that never dim in Sin City.
2. Open ANWR to drilling. But Democrats and others say it would be years before the oil came online. Yes, but we instruct people to save for their retirement even though it will be years before they can use it and they only place a small percentage of their income into retirement accounts. Duh! If we had properly planned during the past 20 years for our energy future, we wouldl not be in this situation and dependent upon foreign sources.
3. Authorize offshore drilling.
4. Authorize more nuclear power plants.
5. Start a 10 year program to develop new sources of energy including the use of clean coal, shale oil, and other available options.
6. Listen to T. Boone.
However, Sen. Reid is not serious. Sen. Reid is a political hack and refuses to offer real solutions to the energy problems we face. Reid wants high gas prices as a tool to use against McCain and Republicans.
1. Force the casinos in Las Vegas to cut their energy costs in half by next month. Imagine how much energy would be saved if the folks in Las Vegas turned off one half the hideous lights that never dim in Sin City.
2. Open ANWR to drilling. But Democrats and others say it would be years before the oil came online. Yes, but we instruct people to save for their retirement even though it will be years before they can use it and they only place a small percentage of their income into retirement accounts. Duh! If we had properly planned during the past 20 years for our energy future, we wouldl not be in this situation and dependent upon foreign sources.
3. Authorize offshore drilling.
4. Authorize more nuclear power plants.
5. Start a 10 year program to develop new sources of energy including the use of clean coal, shale oil, and other available options.
6. Listen to T. Boone.
However, Sen. Reid is not serious. Sen. Reid is a political hack and refuses to offer real solutions to the energy problems we face. Reid wants high gas prices as a tool to use against McCain and Republicans.
Saturday, June 21, 2008
On Energy II
More thoughts about our energy "crisis."
We would not have a "crisis" if we had planned for the future during the 70s, 80s, and 90s. We are now paying the price for sticking our heads deep into the sand and refusing to plan for the future prosperity of the nation.
Thanks to the extremists on the Left and their fellow traveling Democrats and a dishonest media we find ourselves over a barrel. Liberals, lefties, and others have blocked a rational and sensible energy policy for decades. We have not built a new refinery in more than 25 years thanks to these people. We have not used our own resources, offshore, onshore, crude oil, natural gas, coal, and other sources of available energy because it is politically incorrect to drill for gas/oil or to use shale oil and a new sources of oil.
One reason is that crude oil is considered a pollutant.
Oil as it comes from the Earth is organic!
Oil is/was created by Nature's God for our use.
The liberals and most Democrats (Obama, Clinton, et al) want to punish the oil companies because of high fuel prices. They want to raise taxes, always the first weapon of choice for most Democrats, so they can buy more votes by re-distributing wealth.
Democrats should look at the cost of crude when gasoline sold for $1.29 a gallon and compared that cost to todays cost. If only they were so indignant at the mind boggling cost of higher education today. Why not haul college and university CEOs in for a Congressional whipping since education costs have greatly outpaced energy cost during the past two decades.
What is a rational person to do?
We would not have a "crisis" if we had planned for the future during the 70s, 80s, and 90s. We are now paying the price for sticking our heads deep into the sand and refusing to plan for the future prosperity of the nation.
Thanks to the extremists on the Left and their fellow traveling Democrats and a dishonest media we find ourselves over a barrel. Liberals, lefties, and others have blocked a rational and sensible energy policy for decades. We have not built a new refinery in more than 25 years thanks to these people. We have not used our own resources, offshore, onshore, crude oil, natural gas, coal, and other sources of available energy because it is politically incorrect to drill for gas/oil or to use shale oil and a new sources of oil.
One reason is that crude oil is considered a pollutant.
Oil as it comes from the Earth is organic!
Oil is/was created by Nature's God for our use.
The liberals and most Democrats (Obama, Clinton, et al) want to punish the oil companies because of high fuel prices. They want to raise taxes, always the first weapon of choice for most Democrats, so they can buy more votes by re-distributing wealth.
Democrats should look at the cost of crude when gasoline sold for $1.29 a gallon and compared that cost to todays cost. If only they were so indignant at the mind boggling cost of higher education today. Why not haul college and university CEOs in for a Congressional whipping since education costs have greatly outpaced energy cost during the past two decades.
What is a rational person to do?
Thursday, June 19, 2008
On Energy
As I age I realized my energy level is not what it was a few years ago. This means I cannot perform tasks as quickly as in the past. However, personal energy to work, to play, and to ride my bike is not the kind of energy I want to discuss today.
I want to talk about the other energy; the energy that powers our economy and our national life as we are the most mobile people in the world.
For more than 100 years petroleum has fueled the world. The use of fossil fuels is the source of our standard of living, the reason for our productivity, the reason for our prosperity, and until a practical and useful replacement is found, will continue to be the major source of the energy used in this world.
That is just the way it is.
Which is why I cannot understand the lack of a sensible energy policy by our national government. Democrats oppose every effort to develop new sources of fossil fuel. At the same time these Democrats complain about high energy costs and our dependence on foreign sources. Yet they refuse to recognize the obvious.
We must use our own sources to increase supply and lower the cost to the economy. The United States is the third largest producer of oil in the world. And the US has proven reserves and undeveloped fields that could last for centuries ( and give us freedom from foreign sources) if only Congress would do the right thing and authorize development of these vast untapped reserves.
Why won't Congress allow more exploration and development of our reserves?
Mainly it is political dogma and ideology that keeps us from becoming energy independent.
If it were up to me I would do this:
1. Use ANWR. The folks in Alaska are all for it but are held hostage by the elites from the extreme coasts.
2. Use shale oil which by some reports hold billions and billions of barrels of oil.
3. Use nuclear power. If the French can use it to produce most of their electricity, why can't we?
4. Use wind power by installing wind mills (first at Cape Cod to prove that the famous and rich do not escape their social responsibility)
5. Develop new souces of energy including hydrogen, electric, and new methods to power our vehicles.
6. The Chinese are beginning to develop Cuba's offshore oil fields only a few miles from our coast, yet the Democrats refuse to allow more offshore drilling by Americans. Why?
7. We must do more to conserve energy.
Energy.
I wish I had more of it.
I want to talk about the other energy; the energy that powers our economy and our national life as we are the most mobile people in the world.
For more than 100 years petroleum has fueled the world. The use of fossil fuels is the source of our standard of living, the reason for our productivity, the reason for our prosperity, and until a practical and useful replacement is found, will continue to be the major source of the energy used in this world.
That is just the way it is.
Which is why I cannot understand the lack of a sensible energy policy by our national government. Democrats oppose every effort to develop new sources of fossil fuel. At the same time these Democrats complain about high energy costs and our dependence on foreign sources. Yet they refuse to recognize the obvious.
We must use our own sources to increase supply and lower the cost to the economy. The United States is the third largest producer of oil in the world. And the US has proven reserves and undeveloped fields that could last for centuries ( and give us freedom from foreign sources) if only Congress would do the right thing and authorize development of these vast untapped reserves.
Why won't Congress allow more exploration and development of our reserves?
Mainly it is political dogma and ideology that keeps us from becoming energy independent.
If it were up to me I would do this:
1. Use ANWR. The folks in Alaska are all for it but are held hostage by the elites from the extreme coasts.
2. Use shale oil which by some reports hold billions and billions of barrels of oil.
3. Use nuclear power. If the French can use it to produce most of their electricity, why can't we?
4. Use wind power by installing wind mills (first at Cape Cod to prove that the famous and rich do not escape their social responsibility)
5. Develop new souces of energy including hydrogen, electric, and new methods to power our vehicles.
6. The Chinese are beginning to develop Cuba's offshore oil fields only a few miles from our coast, yet the Democrats refuse to allow more offshore drilling by Americans. Why?
7. We must do more to conserve energy.
Energy.
I wish I had more of it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
