Apologies Not Accepted...

Nothing has been as controversial as the revisionist approach to the only wartime use of nuclear weapons as that by the United States against Japan in World War II. Now, thanks to Wikileaks, we see that President Obama had intended to apologize at Hiroshima and Nagasaki for the very necessary use of these weapons by the United States. It may be fairly argued that the use of these weapons prevented an even greater conflict after the war in which nations may have been equally armed and inclined to use them in a more remote theater of war. Think tactical use by the United States in Korea or Vietnam, deployment to battlefield troops by the Russians in Cuba or even use by the Chinese in Cambodia or Laos.

It is customary for American naval vessels to never dip their flag in salute to any other nation;s vessel, I would have hoped the Commander in Chief had kept this in mind when traveling abroad.

Apologies Not Accepted - Investors.com

Crossing the line...

I run the header of Day by Day Cartoons by Chris Muir because I like his art, generally agree with the premise of the cartoon and have actively supported his work financially. I am not, however, very fond of the most recent strip detailing salacious attributes to Obama political appointee Kevin Jennings.

Claims made by various pundits on media outlets, like FOX and CNN, have been proven to be incorrect and exaggerated. Media Matters details the pivotal issue around a self reported event by Mr. Jennings which occurred early in his teaching career. This is a baseless measure for pursuing his resignation. Whether he is qualified to hold the post by virtue of academic or experiential qualifications is a different matter.

A person’s sexual orientation should generally be off limits. There are boundaries – pedophiles are clearly a category in which orientation should be considered disqualifying.

What concerns me is the role these “czar’s” play in policy development. Having known a number of political appointees, I have found them to be a mixed bag. In areas requiring highly specialized knowledge, they tend to be well qualified and provide value to the nation. In roles in which their position is simply to maintain the administration’s philosophy, I have found them to be negative influences on their organization, and by extension the nation.

I would like to see more accountability from our government and much better transparency. I trust the government to act in my best interests and spend my money wisely, both for today and tomorrow.

The greatest sacrifice...

The Medal of Honor, MOH, in its current form represents the highest level of sacrifice a citizen can make.  What has always struck me about this award is the simple bravery which was exhibited by a member of the armed forces in the face of overwhelming danger and chaos. 

 

- CD

Obama to Award Medal of Honor to Soldier
Wed, 16 Sep 2009 11:31:00 -0500

Obama to Award Medal of Honor to Soldier American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, Sept. 16, 2009 - President Barack Obama is scheduled tomorrow night to award the Medal of Honor to Army Sgt. 1st Class Jared C. Monti at a White House ceremony. The ceremony will mark Obama's first award of the nation's highest military honor, and the sixth Medal of Honor awarded since Sept. 11, 2001. Obama will present the award posthumously to Monti's family. His parents, Paul and Janet Monti, are scheduled to accept the award. He also is survived by a brother, sister and niece. Monti, of Raynham, Mass., was 30 when he was killed June 21, 2006, in a firefight in Gowardesh, Afghanistan, near the Pakistan border. He was assigned to the 10th Mountain Division's 3rd Squadron, 71st Calvary, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, out of Fort Drum, N.Y. Monti enlisted in March 1993 and attended basic training and advanced individual training at Fort Sill, Okla. His military honors include the Bronze Star, Purple Heart, five Army Commendation Medals, four Army Achievement Medals, three Good Conduct Medals and three National Defense Service Medals. He was posthumously promoted to sergeant first class. The Medal of Honor is awarded to servicemembers who distinguish themselves conspicuously by gallantry above and beyond the call of duty while engaged in military action against an enemy of the United States. The award for extraordinary merit has been bestowed on 3,447 men and one woman since President Abraham Lincoln signed it into law Dec. 21, 1861. Five servicemembers have received the Medal of Honor -- all posthumously -- for service since 9/11.

Related Sites: Special Report: Medal of Honor

Update your subscriptions, modify your password or e-mail address, or stop subscriptions at any time by clicking on your 'User Profile' page at https://service.govdelivery.com/service/user.html?code=USDOD. You will need to use your e-mail address to log in. If you have questions or problems with the subscription service, please e-mail support@govdelivery.com.

Have another inquiry? Visit the online FAQ at www.defenselink.mil/faq/comment.aspx for up-to-date information.

Get the help you, your family, and fellow servicemembers need, when you need it. Visit www.WarriorCare.mil to learn more.

Check out the National Resource Directory at www.nationalresourcedirectory.org, a new web-based resource for wounded, ill and injured service members, veterans, their families, families of the fallen and those who support them from the Departments of Defense, Labor, and Veterans Affairs.

This service is provided to you at no charge by U.S. Department of Defense. Visit us on the web at http://www.defenselink.mil/.

GovDelivery, Inc. sending on behalf of the U.S. Department of Defense · 408 St. Peter Street Suite 600 · St. Paul, MN 55102 · 1-800-439-1420

Where's your messiah now...

Make no mistake, I admire and respect our new Commander-in-Chief. I disagree with many of his social policies and am shocked at his inability to rein in a wanton Congress. But he clearly has a grasp of international necessities. So far, his actions seem to be aligned with the continuing ideology of the United States as the sole super power with a moral obligation to act decisively in support of international freedoms and rights.

Most recently, President Obama dispatched United States Navy warships to the South China Sea to escort the unarmed USNS IMPECCABLE. That ship is being harassed while conducting legitimate surveillance near the main Chinese ballistic missile submarine base. The United States has always been a staunch supported of the law of the sea and spends a great deal of time and energy protecting its use an avenue for commerce and trade.

The latest moves by China are classic cold war brinksmanship. This national bravado, much like the launch of the “peaceful” satellite by North Korea, is par for the course for opponents to US policy. Anyone who fails to see the North Korean effort for what it is, a test launch of an ICBM, is likely living in a vegan commune in Oregon. This is now, ironically, in range of North Korean weapons systems.

President Obama has found that the harsh realities of the post Cold War world are complex, extremely volatile and can not be handled with verbal diplomacy alone. Iranian drones have been shot down by US aircraft over Iraq. Detainees released from Guantanamo have shown up in Afghan battlefields, Russian forces are illegally consolidating their holdings in South Ossetia and Haiti continues to be fertile ground for backyard instability. And this is simply the open source list of possible threats to global and US security.

This picture paints a precarious one for the United States and the world. As the present economic uncertainty continues, the globe is more vulnerable to shocks from natural and manmade calamities. A capable organization or nation which seeks to further destabilize the world would have any number of choice options to act. It is imperative that free world forces are deployed to counter these threats and that the United States takes the lead in action against individuals, groups and nations that seek to undermine law and order.

President Obama has continued the necessary work. I am optimistic that my new boss will maintain a healthy pragmatism when deciding on national security issues. He certainly has abandoned that in the financial realm.

America 1, Media 0...

One hundred and thirty-six million American citizens cast their vote for the next president of the United States. Unlike the election of 2004, their votes were each cast for a candidate, rather than characterized as against. Each vote represented the manifestation of what those individuals believed was right for the country.

Our process then distills these votes into an electoral representation and allocates them to the various candidates.

President-elect Barack Obama will serve as the 44^th President of the United States. I am disappointed that my candidate, Senator John McCain did not win, but I am overjoyed by the process. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the energy and enthusiasm of the voters was inspiring. There was engagement in our political process, an engagement repeated more than 136,000,000 times across the nation.

As a dear friend, and fellow servant of the Constitution, Mud-Shark commented.

WE win.

That’s the collective WE. The American people, not the special interests, the unions, the corporations (although they are representations of the people) won last night.

So who lost?

The media.

For days and weeks they pandered to our most base instincts. There were cries about underlying racism, the Bradley effect, and general stereotyping of the American public and by extension the voter. There were continuing vilifications of the usual suspects (the present administration, big business and Wall Street).

And yet, at the end of the day – none of that was real or true. The people made their choice regardless of race or gender. Notwithstanding Tina Fey’s deadly interpretation of Governor Sarah Palin, tens of millions of Americans made their choice in her favor. Joe Biden’s repeated gaffes were overlooked as even more people voiced their confidence in his running mate.

But what is different about this election from previous? In 2004 we reelected George W. Bush over John Kerry. In 2000 Al Gore was beaten in an electoral showdown. It was a tough process, requiring the exercise of contingencies almost never used. Nonetheless, it was the process and subsequent analysis by numerous investigations revealed no wrongdoing or illegal activities.

The country will rally around the new President in 2009 because that is the right thing to do. There will certainly be those who continually cast criticism on his administration, but that is expected in the give and take of politics. What will NOT happen is the ridiculous disavowals which took place after 2000 and 2004.

Why?

Frankly, the members of the Republican party are better losers. It is my contention that they acknowledge their duty and commitment to our election process. We did not see this in 2000 or 2004. A cottage industry arose to denounce the elected President as “illegitimate”. This was wrong. It reflected poorly upon us as a nation and flew in the face of the covenants upon which our country is founded.

One of my good friends still clings to this belief. That somehow the process was “hijacked” in 2000 and 2004. That the electorate was “fooled” or manipulated by the machinations of Karl Rove. When Barack Obama thanked his campaign strategist in his acceptance speech, should we infer nefarious activity behind the scenes?

No.

Barack Obama ran a relentless, efficient and effective campaign. End of story. His message convinced more of America than John McCain’s. Voters may be driven by self-interest (who isn’t), under- or mis-informed at times, but they are not stupid. They never have been. We didn’t suddenly send the population of the United States off to college at the end of 2004 in order to prepare them for this election.

What is equally disturbing is an opinion voiced by Citizen Prime this morning. She was worried that if the election were close (McCain popular versus an Obama electoral), there would be civil unrest. Sadly, many people probably believed that this was possible.

Who led us to these terrible stereotypes of our fellow citizens?

It is the media. In their quest for the most sensational, salable story, they will latch onto the most base and low view of our society. The adage of “if it bleeds it leads” was coined in newsrooms across the country. Despite the peripheral reporting of extreme events, the candidate’s campaigns were focused, fair and tough.

I ruefully shook my head to listen to the collective media pundits’ professed surprise that everything went as smoothly as it did. That somehow we overcame the worst traits they attributed to us to make our choice. Miraculously, they mused, America had lived up to its founding father’s expectations.

What self serving bullshit.

We live up to our ideals every four years. The smooth, non-violent transfer of power is a process which has served the Republic for more than two centuries. The rules don’t change.

It’s time we recognize that as a people.

Country first.

E-day...

At last.

At long last.

The day many Americans have waited for since 2000. Today is the de facto day when the current administration cedes control of the government to its successor. No matter who wins (disclosure – I voted for McCain) there will be substantial change in Washington, DC.

I think the campaigns were conducted well. I think the media slant towards Obama was disgraceful. There will be an endless series of post mortems on this election, some of which will be very good and useful. Many of which will be partisan whining or gloating. I shall avoid the latter.

CBS has posted a few questions to ponder about the election. I do not intend to watch anything on television about the race tonight. I will prefer to read about it on the morrow in The World’s Worst Newspaper^TM, also known as the Atlanta Journal Constitution. The new President and almost certainly overwhelmingly Democratic controlled congress will step into a number of challenges.

1) The conflict in Iraq is almost done, it appears we have been victorious. How do we manage this transition properly?

2) Afghanistan requires more attention and non-military support – including a lot of diplomatic support from Pakistan.

3) Iran remains troubling, although there may be more posturing here than credible threat. They have been hit by oil price collapse and the dearth of capital.

4) The economy. This elephant in the room is an unbelievable item to tackle. Some changes seem easy – fix mark to market accounting. Other challenges are much more daunting – how to revise the tax code fairly. Senator Obama’s plan, as is, will make things worse.

5) The environment. Some would classify me as an AGW denialist. I have personally spoken to real climate scientists who are convinced of AGW (anthropogenic global warming) and others who are more reserved. Bottom line, maintaining our environment is critical to our survival – fishing grounds, potable water and the like are essential. A sound energy policy (alternate fuels, nuclear power, R&D credit) is a key component to this issue.

6) Everything else. These include health care, immigration and foreign issues like Russia and Africa. We need to allocate the appropriate resources in these areas. Health care needs support (McCain’s tax credit is preferable to Obama’s bureaucracy) in the area of funding, tort reform and more preventative approaches. Immigration requires a flexible policy, acknowledgement of illegals in country (some type of amnesty / path to citizenship / guest worker) approach.

Russia may solve itself via the economic crisis and their misstep in Georgia. Africa requires some UN / US involvement which would include armed forces. Diplomacy has failed in the Congo and Sudan. Millions of innocent people are at risk and must be protected.

Other than that, the next four years should be a cake walk!

I will also admonish those whose only existence seems to be to decry the present administration to take a step back and take an objective look. There is much to fault the current administration for in its tenure. But a lot of the criticism is either erroneous or undeserved.

At least after today I can talk about it in the past tense.

Best day ever...

I was just a number.

That number was seven hundred and forty-five to be exact.

I stood in the West Atlanta recreation / senior center gymnasium and stared up a bleachers full of people. People just like me. Citizens. They were old and young. There were the well dressed and shabbily attired, some with children in tow. They read newspapers, books, talked on cell phones and chatted quietly. That quiet chatter collecting to become a buzz among the concrete walls and parquet floors.

I was also not like them. I was number 745 for advance voting. But I was also the only white male in the African-American audience at that early hour of the day. Scarcely a person paid me any attention as I crossed the open floor and ascended the bleachers to sit and wait for my number to be called.

If this was advance voting, I mused, then election day will be chaos.

But the scene was far from chaotic. As I perched on the backless benches, I asked what number we had reached. The answer came quickly from a petite woman calling up to the stands,

“If your number is from 85 to 115, please form a line down here”, gesturing to the top row of the bleachers. She then disappeared around a wall. I stared at my near three quarters of a thousand number and then at my watch. This would require patience.

A ring of my cell phone alerted me to a call from Citizen Prime. She was on the north side and also seeking to perform her patriotic duty (no, not paying more taxes). I told her about my number and we collectively groaned. It was likely that our respective votes would cancel each other out, but the effort was required.

The morning dragged on and soon figures were visible on the far side of the gym. They carried in box after box of potato chips, granola bars and cases of water. One by one, the waiting voters walked across the vacant gym and retrieved a bag or two of chips and a water. An enterprising little girl, no more than five years old, made several trips across the floor delivering her bounty to a variety of people seated in the bleachers. Finally, her mother was called to vote and, lifting her daughter on high, ended her first job as a waitress.

The mood in the gym was electric. These were people on a mission. They were poised to deliver their opinion in the action of their vote. A woman back and to my left had the lucky number of 999. There was no way she would be deterred from her duty. Asking my seatmates if they would like some water or chips, I made my own trek to the oasis of Frito-Lay. Upon turning about, I was stunned to note that the population of the gym had seemingly doubled in the last two hours.

I climbed back to my perch, continuing to exchange pleasantries with my seatmates, an older woman, a well dressed young man and a dapper lady in a rhinestone banded fedora who proclaimed herself to be 57, although she looked ten years younger.

We never traded names. Each person was content to clutch their secret prayer, as if en route to the wailing wall. They were eager to cast it into the electronic ether and await the deity’s answer.

At long last, around 1:30pm, my set of numbers was called. Obediently, I lined up and presented by credentials to the poll worker. Why people complain about picture IDs is beyond me. There was no one in that hall who didn’t have one form of acceptable ID. After our initial vetting, we were ushered into the halls of the senior / recreation center.

I was greeted with the sight of rooms of seniors, talking and waiting for various services – flu shots, financial counseling and a voting. The staff moved smoothly among the eldest and exhibited quiet respect for people who had likely stood on the front lines of the battle to secure the civil and voting rights for the bulk of citizens here today. One older gentleman sat directly across from the entryway and looked each of us in the eye. His navy blue ball cap proclaimed “World War II” veteran.

He looked each of us over as if weighing our worth to cast a ballot. I felt a moment of utter transparency as I passed in front of his gaze. I acknowledged his service with a brief nod. I could sense that he expected me to carry out my task with seriousness and reverence for the actions of all those before me.

I arrived at the terminal where my registration was verified and accepted the small yellow card which was my key to vote. I stood next to one of my seat mates, number 736. As I approached, I could see over his shoulder that he had selected Senator Obama. He was a young, earnest man – about thirty. Married, he had taken this day to vote – Tuesday’s were his days off and he wanted to insure his choice was counted.

Smiling, I stepped up to the touchscreen display. The ballot was full. President, congress, senators, a host of judges and a variety of funding initiatives for various purposes, all stared at me in LCD illumination. I consider myself well informed. But I confess, some of the names and slots were mysterious.

Most disappointing to me were the number of unopposed seats for various positions. My personal nemesis, Congressman John Lewis, sat unchallenged on the screen. In an act of sheer frustration, I wrote in my own name to oppose him.

At last I touched the green CAST YOUR BALLOT square. With a sharp click, the yellow card popped out of the machine. It was a far less satisfying sound than the sliding lever pulling back the curtains surrounding voting machines of yore. Machines I only saw with my mother as she dragged me along to vote in Florida so many years ago. She always seemed satisfied as we walked into the autumn sunshine – ever present in Florida.

Now I walked out into the sunlight. My own inner spiritual citizen refreshed by a seemingly simple process which transpires, like clockwork, every four years. Simply basking in the glow of fellow citizens exercising their right replenished my own faith on our nation.

It was the best day ever.

A tale of two citizens...

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.

I travel a fair amount. It is a benefit and curse. I truly prefer the comforts of home and family, but relish the exploratory feelings and experience of travel. As I sat down on the outbound and inbound flights over the past weekend, I had the opportunity to meet and talk with two citizens of this nation. Two citizens who represent, I think, the wide gulf among the political views of the country.

These citizens are alike in many ways. They will have an impact on our nation and come from two of the battleground states. One, a MIT educated mechanical engineer starting his first real job. The other is a college educated, professional mother of two who runs her own business and works in the PR field.

As I sat down on the flight from the relative chaos of Atlanta Hartsfield, I noted a young man making his way down the aisle, sweeping his eyes along the seat row numbers for his place on the packed airliner. He had a youthful, grunge style beard topped by an unruly mop of black hair. Had he been clean shaven, he would have looked about fourteen. He wore a large scale Obama t-shirt, one of the ones with his picture emblazoned upon on it in Warhol style.

Lo and behold, this young, pale kid was going to sit next to me. Sliding in next to the window, he looked about with the eagerness of someone who still enjoys air travel. I scanned him for some opportunity to talk with him, that didn’t start with;

“So, you’re an Obama supporter, eh sonny?”

Looking him over carefully, I noted my opening. There on his right hand, looking like a Super Bowl championship ring was the golden beaver. For the uninitiated, the mascot of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology is a beaver. It is displayed on their rings prominently and referred to as the “golden beaver”. MIT is one of the top technology schools in the nation. It’s students have contributed to the innovation and growth of our nation in every major field of science.

As it turned out, this young man was a mechanical engineer, as am I. We engaged in the sort of discussion that only engineers, upon discovering their commonality, can. I learned that he was newly employed by Johnson and Johnson in their surgical tool design division. He was one of the few, bright handpicked graduates to enter the J&J management development program. He was an intelligent guy with a wide range of interests. We talked about his motorcycle, his love of rock climbing and his recent prize possession, a Volvo C30, five cylinder turbo he bought directly from the factory in Sweden. He traveled there, bringing along his mother, and then drove to Denmark where his father resided.

He was excited to be in his new career and loved what he was doing. Although he expressed some dissatisfaction with the social scene in Cincinnati, he was engaged in trying to improve his lot. Traveling home for the first time in more than a year, he was looking forward to doing some scuba diving and an early Thanksgiving dinner with his family. As we got around to politics, he described himself as a social and fiscal liberal. The son of a described “hippie” mother, he seemed comfortable with the promise of a better world, without really worrying about the details.

Like many engineers, I think he expected people to approach problems rationally, without being swayed by outside, irrelevant influences. When he learned that I was in the Navy, he asked me if I supported McCain because he had been in the Navy. And this is when it struck me, his vote was a vote of affiliation. He seemed to support Obama not from some deep alignment with his policies, but from a feeling of affiliation. Obama’s Ivy league academic credentials, his message of hope and change resonated with this young man without really connecting on policy.

There was no real thought as to how an Obama presidency might affect him, his career or his future potential. Senator Obama's initiatives will have an impact on all of these elements. It may prove to be especially hard on his company's surgical tool division. It was ironic that Jake the Engineer’s company was manufacturing all these components in Juarez, Mexico. A fact possibly affected by Obama’s promise to unilaterally rewrite NAFTA at the behest of his Union supporters. Additionally, I expect his career in Johnson and Johnson will likely be very successful, at which point he will cross the $250,000 mark in income (most directors in major corporations can earn this amount in salary and bonuses). It is there he will find himself with a significantly larger tax burden, which he will seek to reduce - substantially. Finally, the impact of the Obama adminstration will likely be negative to J&J’s surgical division with a possible reduction in innovation and growth as the healthcare market is regulated by the government.

On the return trip to Atlanta I staggered through the narrow aisle of the MD-88 looking for my middle seat. The plane was loading horrendously slowly and the woman ahead of me slid her rolling bag smoothly into place and slipped gracefully into her window seat. I took note of her fluid movements and pegged her as a veteran traveler. Looking at the row sign, I also realized that she would be my seat mate. With decidedly less grace, I landed in the middle seat while at the same time praying to the airline gods to make sure the size of my aisle partner was not overwhelming.

Prayers answered, once again I tried to determine if there was a way to open a conversation. I had my new book, The Strongest tribe, by Bing West, but was too tired to read. And then that magic moment of Chopra synchro-destiny occurred. She pulled out her phone. It was a Sprint update of my own HTC model. I leapt on the opening and we chatted about phones. She immediately demonstrated a fairly hardcore approach to selecting her phone and I found her rational style refreshing.

As we talked, I learned that she had served as a public relations manager for Chrysler and ran with the corporate wolves in Michigan. We talked about energy policy and the various approaches underway to address the challenges in the world. She was well versed in policies and shared with me her occupation was as a freelance public relations expert working on a number of projects.

What was most compelling was her personal story of she and her husband’s (a mechanical engineer who had been an electrician in the 1990s before returning to college to obtain his degree) experience with buying, owning and operating a business. The business was a Goodyear tire and auto center. They had ten employees and felt confident in their ability to succeed in a growing area of the nation. They provided employee family health insurance, solid benefits and service to the community. As she described it, she and her husband thought themselves the “smartest people on the planet”.

Then the housing crisis hit and one by one the builders stopped their developments and abandoned the area. Their business began losing money and they applied for a catastrophic SBA loan to carry them through the hard time. What they were told was that since they were “coping” there would be no loan. They sold the business at a terrible loss and were forever soured on government intervention in the market.

They picked up the pieces and carried on, providing for their two daughters and retooling their plans. She was adamant in her opposition to Obama and support for McCain. The toll from Obama's plans upon her liveliehood was that she was expecting, as a small business owner, (making less than the much bandied about $250,000 per year) was going to be crippling to her plans for growth.

She was also fierce in her abhorrence of the media’s complete support of Senator Obama without any real scrutiny and she was frustrated with Senator McCain’s inability to successfully explain his plans – which even Consumer Reports indicated as superior to Obama’s (the healthcare portion). Naturally, her position and contacts afforded her some access to people and information the typical citizen would not have. But we now live in a remarkably more transparent world. Anyone with the will and wit may distill the truth from a myriad of suspiscious claims.

I found the conversation invigorating and oddly parallel to that on my outward bound flight. My spouse, Citizen Prime, in her own world view, would immediately attribute this to some universal force providing me with this opportunity. In this instance, I may agree with her.

Jane the Publicist and Jake the Engineer represent two distinct spectrums of thought in America. One is the unbridled optimism and expectations of someone just beginning their journey as a citizen (I don’t consider college students full citizens as they typically do not pay taxes – citizens in training would be a better moniker). That is the model put forth by Jake the Engineer, or more appropriately Jake the Idealist. He lives in the world of the theoretical, where the ideals of the nation are enshrined. In his world, all things can be solved with the right application of government guidance and human acceptance. He has yet to face a crisis in which his worldview is challenged.

Jane the Publicist, or Jane the Pragmatist, carries those ideals as well. They have been tempered with having to raise a family, meet a payroll and deal with the myriad crises of real life. Some of which include being laid off from a supposedly “secure” corporate job. Jane wants to improve her life and have a positive impact on as many people around her as she can. She wants to be fair and provide incentives and support for her employees. She expects those who work for her to pull their weight in order to share in the reward. It is a reasonable and typical independent American philosophy.

It is not a dissimilar view from Jake the Idealist. A view that he will likely share in a decades time.

With Senator Obama we have an idealist – setting aside the burden you believe he carries to special interest groups. With Senator McCain we have a pragmatist – setting aside whatever connections you believe he has to the present administration.

It is the individual who understands the balance between government facilitation and government control who I want leading the nation. I am just not sure if the rest of the country understands this choice.

At least Joe the Plumber had the courage to ask the question, even if our media will not.

When all is said and done...

The polls are swinging consistently in favor of Obama. The economic crisis has proven the old adage that all politics are local. When people begin to worry about their savings, jobs and ability to pay their bills, they will grasp at any new idea - no matter how flimsy. Ironically, during an external crisis (war, for example) people are unwilling to swap leadership as the risk appears too great. Make no mistake, Senator Obama has no better plan for the economy than John McCain and his economic viewpoint is more at odds with a capitalistic, free-market society than anyone. What will mitigate his approach will be the economic reality on the ground. He can not possibly make fundamental changes with entitlement programs consuming the bulk of his budget and potentially flat revenue.

The next president will have to face down excessive spending, reignite capital movement and (hopefully) foster innovation as a source of growth for the nation. Unlike those on the far left of the spectrum who boldly proclaimed their intention to depart the United States for other lands, I have no intention of doing so. A nation run by Barack Obama will STILL be head and shoulders over ANY other nation on the planet. It will be my civic duty to make sure that the new President doesn't wander into areas I consider unhealthy for the nation (second amendment issues, income redistribution, abandoning free trade, national defense, etc.). At the same time, the new president will have to perform.

We don't live in an era of blind trust anymore. The watershed collapse of that began in the 1960s and has continued through the ultra-transparent years of the internet ascendancy. Individuals who wish to blindly blame the current administration for the financial problems reveal themselves immediately and either uninformed or ideologues. What we have seen is that a 14 trillion dollar economy requires careful handling and something as innocuous as extending the envelope of risk acceptance for capital investment (i.e. dicey mortgages) can precipitate a global catastrophe.

That is a change we certainly could have done without.

The race...

I am very fortunate.  I am able to subscribe to XM radio and benefit from a variety of programming (almost all of it free of commercials).  One of my newest favorites is XM 130.  This is the POTUS (President of the United States) channel.  And before the members of my Chomsky reading fan base chime in, it is NOT twenty-four seven playing of George Bush saying the word "nucular".  It is a great collection of partisan news programs, non-partisan interviews and commentary from great folks in the thick of the campaign process.  It's been on the air almost a year and covers candidate speeches unfiltered from start to finish.  This channel, like sources such as www.factcheck.org, reflect the continuing evolution of real information politics.  It was observed today that by the principal of a focus group company (www.mediacurves.com) that both candidate's negative ads are being viewed negatively by both sides.  What is clear from the voting population is that they want to hear some substantive ideas from either candidate.  This is something that neither side is delivering.  Between Sarah Palin being pinned down by Katie Couric on John McCain's legislative record, to Joe Biden claiming he was "forced down" in a helicopter in Afghanistan, the candidates aren't giving the voters any meat for their political stew.

 

I have set myself solidly down in the McCain camp.  There are many positive reasons and some negative ones.  On the positive front, I think he will manage the economy better.  He is an advocate for smaller government and revising our tax code to favor growth, innovation and investment.  He is far superior in the realm of national security and his personal military experience (and yes, his captivity) give him a unique human perspective on the cost of conflict.  Finally, he is decidedly out of the mainstream in his party with regard to social issues.  Although he claims to be "pro-life" and touts in a 2007 statement that he will appoint conservative judges to the SCOTUS, his past record and actions contradict that.  My sense is that once elected, he will simply walk away from these "distraction" issues and govern.

 

Senator Obama captures my attention for his ambition, skill and rhetoric.  I am very concerned about his pedigree (Bill Ayers and the Annenberg Challenge specifically).  I am deeply concerned about his position on guns.  I do not think his financial plan for the nation is viable.  As one of the "rich" taxpayers he is targeting, I think his approach to revenue generation is flatly socialist and at odds with the foundation of our nation's economic strength.  He is also opposed to missile defense, the single biggest tool in our diplomatic arsenal.  The mere suggestion that we would place units in Poland or Ukraine gained substantial attention from Russia.  The ability to defend Japan or any of the Persian Gulf states from North Korea or Japan is critical to maintaining stability in the region. 

 

I am not vitriolicly opposed to Obama, as many seem to be towards McCain.  And I don't think that Obama's race makes a whit of difference (although I think that Hillary's did to the DNC).  And so onward the race trundles.  McCain's "put your money where your mouth is" move to delay the debate synched nicely with his "country first" message.  

Biden his time...

<

Sweet nellie potellie. Joe Biden?

Did I hear correctly?

The eternal senator from Delaware? Posing windbag who had previously said he would never accept a nomination to the VP slot?

Barack, is this a joke?

He may have "strong foreign policy experience", but another way tosay this is that he has presided over a lot of hearings.

I don't think this is going to give him the edge he wanted.

Besides, Biden is at times left of Obama.

Pre-Convention Prediction...

At the risk of seeming really foolish - here are my predictions for the November elections in 2008.

 

Popular Vote

• McCain - 53%
• Obama - 44%
• Independent / Other - 3%

I predict Obama to carry Illinois and New York but no other states of consequence.  

 

Why?  Well, dear reader(s), it stems from the simple fact that the nation would rather stand with the known and experienced than the unknown and inexperienced.  I respect Senator Obama's capability to be a good president.  But that's me.  Multiply any personal uncertainty by the population of voters and you have a smoothing effect which places the advantage squarely in McCain's court.    Short of selecting Vladimir Putin as VP, I think the Arizona senator is on the ascendant.

 

Wedge issues are not in play here.  Gun control was taken off the table by the Supreme Court.  The Iraq war is transitioning well.  There is a real risk the economy will improve, as it tends to do in the fourth quarter.  Finally, the behavior of Russia in Georgia will underscore the real threats existent in the world and the role of the United States as the ONLY real bulwark against unchecked aggression, although I am disappointed at our "public" response.

 

So, mark your calendars and place your wagers.  I have been known to make wild bets and lose them gloriously.  As a good friend of mine advised, go big or go home.

 

Contingency...

Remember this? Howard Dean riding high and then collapsing in a primal scream of goofiness. I can only hope the same holds true for the weight losing, Mike Huckabee.

The presidential race is certainly heating up. MSNBC, also known as Major Source of News for Backroom Communists, is predicting a wild turnover of events in the primaries. I am not surprised. With the duration of the campaign season, it is inevitable that cracks would appear in the heir apparent's armor. Personally, I am excited. Politics has seemed to come alive again in the American spirit and a more civil discourse of issues appears to be taking place.

Let me offer a few of my own plans for election day in 2008. As the selection of potential candidates is essentially out of my hands, I will present a simple IF-THEN approach to voting.

Fair warning, I am a registered republican. In college I worked on George H. W. Bush's campaign. I was a registered libertarian for a period in the mid to late 1990s, but never voted the party ticket. I abandoned them after better understanding their overly "hands off" approach to too many critical issues.

1) I see no third party candidate of any interest. The fact that multiple parties still offer up candidates. However, the winnowing of candidates into two parties is efficient and effective. I am of the strong opinion that all politics is local.

2) If Mike Huckabee secures the GOP nomination or VP slot – I will vote against him, even for Hillary Clinton or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad .

3) Barack Obama, for all his naïve nature is VERY electable.

In general I am optimistic. Our foreign policy has not converted the world into a firestorm of US hatred – anymore than it was prior to September 11, 2001. The real challenges remain as global security and human freedom, the economy and managing growth (thus its impact on the environment).

Healthcare, in my opinion is a red herring. This goes for immigration as well. Both require detailed solutions to some of the programmatic and fiscal aspects, but from a policy perspective – no major change is truly warranted.

On to Pakistan....

Senator Barack Obama has said that, as President, he would invade Pakistan if that government will not do more to deal with terrorists. His foreign policy vision is already the talk of many.

Isn't this the same logic precipitating our action into Iraq? Is the left radically changing their views? Are some nations more sovreign than others? I mean we had asked the (then) government to comply with UN mandates. They failed to do so, we had an active military action under constant attack in the northern and southern no-fly zones. Thus we acted multi-laterally in removing the non-compliant government.

Am I missing some moral equivalency? We did the same thing in Afghanistan (the good invasion). I mean are there bad guys out there who deserve military action or not? Is simple diplomacy enough?

Sheesh.

UPDATE: Read the comment by Mud Shark. I would also like to invite our dear readers to post their top five foreign policy concerns (for the purposes of this discussion, free trade and immigration will NOT be a foreign policy concern). In addition, I would invite the readers to post their top five solutions - and any references to candidates who seem to be aligned with their views.