Did Obama really save GM?

George Will is one of my favorite conservative writers and pundits. A few weeks ago he framed the takeover of General Motors in a way that might make liberals, I mean progressives, cringe in his piece titled "Liberalism, as we know it".
Here is an excerpt from it:

"After a delusional proclamation — General Motors “has come roaring back” — Obama said: “Now I want to do the same thing with manufacturing jobs, not just in the auto industry, but in every industry.” We have been warned.
Obama’s supposed rescue of “the auto industry” — note the definite article, “the” — is a pedal on the political organ he pumps energetically in Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan and elsewhere. Concerning which:

He intervened to succor one of two of the U.S. auto industries. One, located in the South and elsewhere, does not have a long history of subservience to the United Auto Workers and for that reason has not needed Obama’s ministrations. He showered public money on two of three parts of the mostly Northern auto industry, the one long entangled with the UAW. He socialized the losses of GM and Chrysler. Ford was not a mendicant because it was not mismanaged.

Today, “I am GM, hear me roar” is again losing market share, and its stock, of which taxpayers own 26 percent, was trading Thursday morning at $21, below the $33 price our investor in chief paid for it and below the $53 price it would
have to reach to enable taxpayers to recover the entire $49.5 billion bailout."

The GM takeover and their subsequent performance gives me cause to pause when I hear it used as an achievement of the administration. How can a candidate boast about a deal that has lost taxpayers so much money?

---

Is Church a place to discuss Political Issues?

A few weeks ago Michelle Obama, the First Lady of the USA, said these words to the African Methodist Episcopal Church’s 49th general conference, held in in Nashville, Tennessee:

"To anyone who says that church is no place to talk about these issues, you tell them there is no place better – no place better. Because ultimately, these are not just political issues – they are moral issues."

I like the idea of discussing politics in church and like the thought of presenting a moral aspect of issues from the pulpit. Seems like an appropriate teaching venue. Yet I am not in favor of preachers slamming or endorsing candidates. In my opinion, biased politicking has no place in spiritual messages. What do you think?

---

State of the Union, Questions and Responses

I heard two of these questions today on the radio and threw in one of my own. Here are the questions and my answers to them:

1. Do you think it is your civic duty to watch the State of the Union address tonight?
   No. I used to watch them all of the time but have grown tired of all of the rhetorical speech and partisan reactions in the chamber. Watching half the room stand/clap and the other half sit with sour faces brings out the cynic in me. And one thing I do not need more of is cynicism.
2. What do you think about Representative Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) giving a response speech for the Tea Party?
   Could be one of the most divisive things that has been pushed on the GOP since the Tea Party has experienced it's rise to power. It will be interesting to see where Ms. Bachmann agrees and disagrees with Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI). 
3. Is it really necessary for the GOP and the Tea Party to give nationally televised speeches responding to the president's speech?
   No. These responses have always annoyed me. They are many times a sad case of sour grapes talk and, in my opinion, no one really cares about the rantings of people who are elected to simply represent their respective states.

Please let me know how you would answer the questions. Even if you disagree.

My Open Letter to the President

Dear President Obama,

It is the day after election day and I am wondering how you are interpreting the results of our national vote. Certainly the country has sent a message to congress by returning the GOP to power in the House of Representatives and reducing the number of Democrats in the Senate. Yet I am wondering, with the rest of America, what kind of message you received and, more importantly, how you will respond in the days, weeks and months ahead. Here are a few thoughts that I have for you on this day after the election:

• I want you to lead, Mr President, in the ways that Presidents Reagan and Clinton led.
  I would like you will take the lead in working with Republican leaders. President Truman once said that the buck stopped at his desk. I hope you will adopt a similar attitude with regard to working with congress. 
• I hope that you will no longer demonize Republicans as "the party of No". I am tired of the name calling Mr President. I want you, as our leader, to set an example of civility. Please do not refer to your political opponents as enemies. We are all Americans and are not enemies of each other. 
• My main concern about our country is the financial legacy that we will leave our children and grandchildren. Please Mr President, earnestly work with congress to balance the budget and reduce our national debt so that our legacy will be one of fiscal responsibility and health.
• In less than four years I will be eligible for Medicare and Social Security. I know that these programs are entitlements and I also know that they are also political hot potatoes. Please take courage and work with congress to fiscally solidify these programs for current and future generations.
• Lastly, please work with the congress to find ways to keep our jobs from being outsourced and foreign workers insourced. Please find ways to protect American workers from greed focused corporations that do not think twice about using unethical practices in their quest for profits both here and abroad.

I am sure that I could list other concerns but I do not want my letter to simply be a laundry list of grievances. Frankly, I am tired of being cynical about our government. I am fed up with seeing polls that reveal such a mistrust and disdain for the congress. I beg you to take leadership and work together with congress to turn this trend around.

I also want you to know that I pray for you, your family, our congress and all who lead in civil government. I know that the job can sometimes be difficult yet I also know that collectively we can do so much more than we can individually. With that I close wishing you much success, and God's blessings, as you lead our nation.

Sincerely, Bob

Healthcare Bill Ramblings

This chart may not be 100% accurate but I think that it is representative of the concerns that many of us have about involving the bureaucratic federal government into this area.

Congress is scheduled to vote this weekend on the 2,700 page healthcare bill. President Obama has postponed his trip abroad to stay home and twist arms.. a lot of Blue Dog Democrats on the fence.. I think that this arm-twisting is such an example of how the politics of Washington, DC has not changed much since the prez was sworn in a little over a year ago.. sad that arms need to be twisted and power-plays are ruling the day.. especially when these folks are saying that the majority of Americans want this bill.

To help us understand the content of those 2,700 pages PolitiFact yesterday published a piece called Top 10 facts to know about health care reform. Following is the list in brief:

1. The plan is not a government takeover of health care like in Canada or Britain.
2. Insurance companies will be regulated more heavily.
3. Everyone will have to have health insurance or pay a fine, a requirement known as the individual mandate.
4. Employers will not be required to buy insurance for their employees, but large employers may be subject to fines if they don't provide insurance.
5. The vast majority of people will not see significant declines in premiums.
6. The plan might or might not bend the curve on health spending.
7. The government-run Medicare program will keep paying medical bills for seniors, but it will begin implementing cost controls on health care providers, mostly through penalties and incentives.
8. Medicaid, a joint federal-state program for the poor, will cover all of the poor, instead of just a few groups the way it currently does.
9. The government won't pay for elective abortions.
10. No one is proposing new benefits for illegal immigrants.

If you want more detail you can read the expanded version here.  My issue in large is not the reform of healthcare.. I think insurance companies need more oversight.. but the power-play that is on display this week in DC. In my opinion something this big needs more of an overwhelming consensus rather than an eked out majority.

As far as the bill goes I am concerned about #3 above - how will this one be enforced? How much will a person who has lost their job be fined? There does seem to be caps on premiums - gotta wonder how these numbers will be calculated? And I am wondering what kind of assistance will be given to folks out of work in this area - will Medicaid cover them?

I have a lot of questions and basically think that a bill of this magnitude will be tweaked for many years.. it seems like a full employment act for government bureaucrats. What do you think? Do you think the bill will be ramrodded through this weekend. I predict it will not.

Redneck Teleprompter

This is about the people, and it's bigger than any one king or queen of a Tea Party, and it's a lot bigger than any charismatic guy with a teleprompter.. -Sarah Palin speaking at the Tea Party Convention

The Rules of First Contact

Anyone who knows anything about Star Trek is familiar with the concept of First Contact. Here is a thought on it from a Trekker:

The term first contact describes the first official encounter between representatives of two races or governments. Occasionally, the official first contact takes place years or even decades after members of the species involved have first met.

That seems to be an okay segue to an AP article titled
SPIN METER: Did Obama grovel? The article begins by saying:

Some conservative commentators seized on President Barack Obama's deep bow to Japan's Emperor Akihito over the weekend, accusing the U.S. commander in chief of groveling before a foreign leader.

The article goes on to say that this is not too unusual and gives examples of how other presidents acted when they interacted with other foreign leaders. It seems silly to call President Obama's act of respect as one of 'groveling'.. comes across to me as pure spin.

What do you think? Did President Bush grovel when he held the hand of Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah's hand? Or do you think it an act of humility to acknowledge another countries leader according to the customs of that country?

I wonder.. what would the Captain of the Enterprise do?

The Most Powerful People

This week Forbes Magazine announced it's list of the 67 most powerful people in the world.. here are their ten most powerful:

1. Barack Obama: 48, President of the United States of America
2. Hu Jintao: 66, President of the People's Republic of China
3. Vladimir Putin: 57, Prime Minister of Russia
4. Ben S. Bernanke: 55, Chairman of the US Federal Reserve
5. Sergey Brin and Larry Page: 36, Founders of Google
6. Carlos Slim Helu: 66, Chief executive of Telmex in Mexico
7. Rupert Murdoch: 78, Chairman of News Corp
8. Michael T. Duke: 59, President, CEO and Director of Wal-Mart
9. Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz al Saud: 85, King of Saudi Arabia
10. William Gates III: 54, Co-Chair Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

A few things that I found interesting about the top ten:

• Half of the folks worked in the private sector and half in a government position.. maybe power comes in those two flavors;
• All of the folks are men - Angela Merkel (55 year old Chancellor of Germany) came in at #15.. less than 10% of the 67 listed were women;
• The average age of the top ten is 60.4 years.. interesting.. tomorrow I will be 60.5 years old.. I am starting to feel so powerful;
• Numbers five and ten on the list includes two people.. sometimes power can only be had when it is shared;
• Six of the ten listed live in the United States.

I also like this quote from the Forbes article that accompanies the list:

I love power. But it is as an artist that I love it. I love it as a musician loves his violin, to draw out its sounds and chords and harmonies.
-Napoleon Bonaparte

I do wonder if anyone on the list doesn't love power? Can anyone have this kind of power and not like it? I think that most on this list probably have a healthy respect for the power that they wield. What do you think?

One Year Later: Politics As Usual

It has been a year since our country elected Barack Obama president. I remember how I naively thought he would bring a new era of consensus and bipartisanship to our country. I remember the atmosphere of hope that seemed to permeate the airwaves of our country.. he really seemed to be a different kind of leader.

The following excerpt from an opinion piece by Doyle McManus this week in the Los Angeles Times describes where many of us are a year later:

When the Gallup Poll asked voters last month if Obama had kept "the promises he made during his presidential campaign," only 48% said yes. And when the pollsters asked whether voters considered Obama a liberal or a moderate, 54% called him a liberal -- a big jump from the 43% who gave that answer on election day in 2008.

Many of those disillusioned voters are moderates and independents, people who voted for Obama not because they supported liberal programs but because they responded to his call for a post-partisan politics. To be sure, Republicans in Congress haven't given Obama many chances to pass bipartisan legislation; they have opted instead for drawing sharp contrasts. At least in the short run, that strategy appears to be working.

Instead of a new centrist consensus, Obama's first year has produced a backlash -- and not only among zealots of the Republican right. Polls show conservative views up across the entire electorate.

My first reaction to the clip is to wonder why the Republicans are painted as the folks not wanting and blocking bipartisan legislation.. like the president and the Democrats want it but they do not. It seems that this is a subtle way to give the president a pass and not paint him as a leader who is either unable or unwanting to achieve bipartisanship.

The reality of Barack Obama's presidency is that it is politics as usual. Democrats are in power these days and they certainly are acting like it. When Republicans had the presidency and a majority in congress they also acted liked it. All the talk of bipartisanship is hollow rhetoric. Nothing has changed much in our capitol.. lobbyists still lobby.. backroom deals are still made.. cynicism rules the day and hope is no where to be found.

It has been a disappointing year for independents and centrists who supported President Obama last year thinking things would be different.

Afghanistan: More Questions than Answers

Over at ForeignPolicy.com Tom Ricks compares "President Bush's decision to surge in Iraq to President Obama's current deliberations." This point in his article caused me to reflect a bit:

"Second, when Bush endorsed the surge, he was rejecting the advice of almost all his military advisors. By contrast, if Obama goes for a troop escalation, he will be embracing the recommendations of his generals."

Ann and I were talking about a surge in Afghanistan a few days ago and I opined about how it is not always wise to listen to the generals.. military officers are tasked to wage and win wars.. presidents and their advisors are tasked to determine the advisability of wars and their accompanying escalations.

When I think about the war in Afghanistan I wonder what the strategy should be over there. I wonder if winning over there is simply keeping terrorists engaged.. keeping them off our American soil. When I think about a major escalation in that war I think about how weary our troops (and their families) are and wonder how much more these few will have to sacrifice for us. I also wonder if a national draft is being considered along with an escalation in forces in Afghanistan. I guess I have more questions than answers.

What do you think we should do in Afghanistan?

President Obama and School Kids

In a KC Star piece titled Obama's speech to students an ugly political mess editorial writer Yael Abouhalkah echoes much of my sentiments over the presidents upcoming speech to the school children of our country.. here is what he said:

The Obama administration shares the blame for making his scheduled speech to K-12 students next Tuesday such an ugly mess.

Sure, the hyperpartisan reaction to it by conservatives and radio shock jocks has drawn the attention of many Americans. They are being told to oppose allowing Obama to shove his politics down their children's throats (which, by the way, isn't what's going to happen).

Now school boards and superintendents across the country are being pressured by right-wing groups to pull the plug on Obama's speech.

But Obama's education officials didn't help their cause by indicating that the speech would be a good occasion for students to outline how they could help Obama be a good president.

Or offer ways for Obama to help serve the nation.

Those suggestions -- now gone from the official website of next Tuesday's speech -- were wrongheaded.

Of course, the speech won't be about politics at all, and most people realize it.

It will be President Obama doing what he does best, trying to inspire young people to stay in school and do their best to get a good education.

Nothing wrong with that at all.

But the missteps by the Obama administration helped confuse the message.

I think that our school kids today so need some inspiration.. a lot of them dropout or are thrown out. Even our suburban KC schools have issues that require schools to have a police officer present during school hours. Lets all hope that the president's speech will help our kids.

Presidential Vacation Policy

My cyberfriend Joe posted an interesting note yesterday about President Obama's vacation. He ending with this note:

"For the record, the presidents who spent more of their presidency on vacation than all other presidents are GHW Bush (37%), GW Bush (33%) and Ronald Reagan (15%). For comparison: Carter, 5%; Clinton, 5%; Obama, 3%."

My last years at AT&T entitled me to 5 weeks of vacation which is pretty close to 10%.. of course I also got 3 "management days" and 9 holidays off. All of this time-off was regulated by corporate policy.. had to work 25 years before you got 5 weeks vactions.. had to work there a year to get 2 weeks vacation.

In light of this corporate background it surprises me that there is not a policy regarding presidential vacations. There may be one.. please let me know if you know of one. And let me know what you think about taking vacations in general.. does your company have a vacation policy?

For the record I am glad that the prez is taking one.. vacations are good stress relievers.

Obama does not want to hear this :)

A bit of fun from the folks at Politico in a Roger Simons column titled: 21 things you can't say to President Barack Obama. Here are a few things from the list of things not to say to the prez after a televised press conference:

1. Hey, we hear the Golf Channel is going to carry it next time. Well, actually, only the Golf Channel is going to carry it next time
3. Professor Gates called. He can’t find his house keys.
8. You want a cigarette?
9. Biden called.
12. The reason we can’t put the questions on the teleprompter is because we aren’t supposed to know the questions in advance.
15. Hillary called.
18. If nobody blogs about it, we think you’ll be OK.

Check out the rest of the list here and let me know if you particularly like one of them. They are pretty funny.

ObamaCare

My Facebook friend Mike posted a link to a Snopes article titled: Senior Death Warrants that responds to a viral email message that uses actress Natasha Richardson's death to proclaim that she would still be alive if her accident happened in the United States instead of Canada. Snopes speaks to the inaccuracy of that email message concluding that it contained inaccuracies and speculation. That viral email goes on to denounce President Obama's healthcare proposals saying that senior citizens would suffer under it. Here are a few of the Snopes responses to the email:

• Obama wants to have our healthcare like Canada's and England's.
  
  Although the health care initiative proposed by President Obama (commonly dubbed "ObamaCare") is often characterized as the adoption of a medical system identical to that used in Canada and/or the UK, that characterization is not accurate. The President's plan calls for providing Americans with the option of government health insurance (which will compete with private insurance plans), not for replacing the entire U.S. medical system with a single-payer, government-funded system. (Critics maintain, though, that a public insurance plan would inevitably drive private insurers out of business, thereby setting the U.S. on the road to government-run health care.)
• In England anyone over 59 cannot receive heart repairs or stents or bypass because it is not covered as being too expensive and not needed.
We could find no documentation supporting the claim that Britain's National Health Service (NHS) absolutely denies all coverage of "heart repairs or stents or bypass" to patients over the age of 59. The NHS did not point us to any such policy in response to our inquiry, and many readers from the UK have told us that they (or someone they personally knew) have had such procedures performed on them despite their being older than 59.
• If this does not sufficiently raise your ire, just remember that Senators and Congressmen have their own healthcare plan that is first dollar or very low co-pay
As federal employees, members of Congress are eligible for the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), which is not a single health care plan but rather a collection of many different private health insurance plans from which enrollees can choose. In general, the FEHBP offerings are similar to Medicare (with prescription drug coverage), although even supporters of a national health program have criticized the FEHBP for having the "same problems of private plans generally: administrative waste, restrictions on health care providers, inequities, and inadequate cost control."

---

I am pretty concerned about the federal government expanding it's control in this area. What the government does is usually bureaucratic and pretty wasteful. That said I do think that reform in healthcare is needed. Many people who really need healthcare either cannot afford it or are denied coverage because of preexisting conditions.. and, as I posted about earlier this year, many people are forced to declare bankruptcy because of medical bills.

I think that the issue needs to be addressed. I wish that the AMA or some other private group would take it on but I don't think that they will. I think that we will be left with whatever congress gives us. Of course.. in ten years most of America will be on Medicare as us baby boomers sail into our senior years :)

Obama: We will not be used by the Iranians

I know that some may feel that President Obama's words and reactions have not gone far enough.. John McCain thinks that the president's response "has not been enough".. though I am unsure what he would really be doing different. I agree with the president's measured response and am glad to see the days of saber rattling and cowboy diplomacy over. We need not be pawns of the rhetoric of Iranian leaders.

What do you think? Do you think McCain would be handling this crisis better?

Old Testament Christians

Did you catch the "news" about pastor and former Southern Baptist Convention officer Wiley Drake who claimed on “The Alan Colmes Show” on Fox News Radio that he is praying “imprecatory prayer” against President Obama. Here is a bit from the shows transcript:

Colmes: “You would like for the president of the United States to die?”

Drake: “If he does not turn to God and does not turn his life around, I am asking God to enforce imprecatory prayers that are throughout the Scripture that would cause him death, that’s correct.”

Can you believe this guy? So sad that many "Christians" hold to an Old Testament view of faith and of life.. small wonder "Christians" get a bad rap for being judgmental and hateful. It is my belief that New Testament Christians should filter everything in Scripture through Jesus.. here is what He had to say about praying for folks you don't like:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven."

My thinking is that Jesus wasn't speaking of “imprecatory prayer”.. hard to love someone and wish them dead. Here's hoping that Wiley Drake isn't praying for me.. or you.

Will Sotomayor replace Souter?

5/26/09 Update: News just broke that President Obama will nominate Sonia Sotomayor to the high court later this morning. Should be an interesting confirmation process.

---

5/1/09 Update: Yesterday's news of Justice David Souter retiring in June got me thinking back to this post. Of course Justice Ginsburg may also choose to retire in June when the current session of the court comes to an end. Interesting to consider that this President HW Bush 1990 supreme court nominee could be replaced by someone that he nominated for a lower court in 1991.

---

3/14/09: George Stephanopoulos recently posted this observation:

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg raised a few eyebrows today with her prediction that President Barack Obama would "surely" pick a Supreme Court justice "soon." 

Here's my question: what are the chances that Obama DOESN'T pick Sonia Sotomayor? 

In her favor, she was appointed to the federal bench by George H.W. Bush. Elevated to the Appeals Court by Bill Clinton. She's a protégé of Daniel Patrick Moynihan and a prosecutor with Robert Morgenthau.  Graduate of Princeton and Yale after growing up in the South Bronx.

And, Sotomayor would be the first Hispanic Justice on the Supreme Court bench

From what I can tell Judge Sotomayor is a liberal and is pro-choice. I wonder how our "pro-life" senators will vote if she is nominated.. of course we could thank "pro-lifer" George HW Bush for nominating her when he was president.

Spock Obama: Where no Prez has Gone B4

Just a bit of Friday night cartoon fun while I wait out the rain before the Royals game.
I did like what our president said yesterday about deficit spending. Here is an excerpt from the Bloomberg report:

President Barack Obama, calling current deficit spending “unsustainable,” warned of skyrocketing interest rates for consumers if the U.S. continues to finance government by borrowing from other countries.

“We can’t keep on just borrowing from China,” Obama said at a town-hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque. “We have to pay interest on that debt, and that means we are mortgaging our children’s future with more and more debt.”

Holders of U.S. debt will eventually “get tired” of buying it, causing interest rates on everything from auto loans to home mortgages to increase, Obama said. “It will have a dampening effect on our economy.”

My first reaction to this news was disbelief.. I really didn't think that the president thought this way. Gotta wonder why he has been spending the way that he has. I think this might be a good sign. What do you think?

Do you think that the president will make any substantial cuts or is this just a bit of covering your back? If things get bad he can always point back to yesterday and say "I told you so".. not that he will :)

100 and counting..

I liked the subtitle on today's front page of West Hawaii Today.. miles to go, promises to keep. I think that the jury is still out on Obama's promises and policies.. one poll I saw has the nation split. Yet I think that the majority of the nation likes the person of the new president and wants him to succeed. Here's wishing President Obama well in the future.. may God bless him with much wisdom as he leads our nation.

Red Envelopes to Washington

4/8/09 Update: The White House confirms that they have received over 2 million red envelopes.. [snarky comment alert].. not sure that the Obama administration was impacted but the post office thanks everyone who participated.. probably generated over a million dollars in revenue for them :)

2/22/09: Got an email from a friend this week urging me to:

Get a red envelope. You can buy them at Kinkos, or at party supply stores. On the front, address it to:

President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington , D.C. 20500

On the back, write the following message.

This envelope represents one child who died because of an abortion. It is empty because the life that was taken is now unable to be a part of our world.

We will mail the envelopes out March 31st, 2009.

Put it in the mail, and send it. Then forward this event to every one of your friends who you think would send one too.
...
Together we can change the heart of The President and save the lives of millions of children.

Does anyone think that this campaign will really work? I guess I don't. I periodically "write my congressman" and always get a form letter response with their position on whatever issue I had wrote them about.. it is generally a huge waste of my time.. albeit a cathartic one.

Don't misunderstand me.. I think that a campaign like this one is a sincere and heartfelt one.. but I don't think that it will change President Obama's views about abortion laws.. but it may help the economy and maybe save a job or two at the post office.

What do you think? Have you found, from personal experience, that our leaders in Washington are responsive to your letters? How would you respond to these red envelopes if you were President Obama?