Massachusetts Conservative Feminist | Ordinary: Degrees of Moderation and Sanity

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Polls Indicate Problems for Embattled Democrats Nationwide

It may still be early to project the outcome of the 2010 general election, yet there appears to be a certain change in the wind according to polls taken across the country. A May 20th Quinnipiac Polls gives Republican Christopher Christie a substantial lead over Democrat Governor Corzine by a 45-38 margin. In New York, The Marist Poll wonders if Paterson’s approval ratings have a bottom. Newly announced, (papers filed yesterday) New York Republican gubernatorial candidate, Rick Lazio, bests Paterson in the another Marist Poll by 3 points. In Massachusetts, incumbent Governor Deval Patrick, has an approval rating only slightly higher than Patterson’s. Christie Mihos, a fiscal conservative, is the first Republican to announce a run against Patrick.

In Connecticut, Senator Chris Dodd, is anxiously waiting for results from the latest Quinnipiac poll due out today. The last poll indicated a 33% approval rating, with Republican, Rob Simmons besting Dodd in early polling. In Nevada, Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, could be easily replaced – the latest poll by Mason-Dixon shows that Reid has a 38% approval rating. Currently, his republican opposition is anti-tax, conservative Sharron Angle.

The current trend towards embattled Democrat Incumbents, most of whom mentioned here are rather high-profile, however, that said, the economy will be the driving factor in the 2010 race. With a Legislature controlled by the Democrat party since 2006, and the White House spending faster than money can be printed, those independents that bought the “middle class tax cut” and make up the majority of the electorate, will push the line in Vegas , which, in all likelihood, stands to favor a Republican resurgence.

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

North Korea, Iran Defiant – Obama - Return of the “Paper Tiger”

North Korea’s continues defiance of both the U.N. and President Obama’s objection to continued nuclear weapons testing reached new heights this Memorial Day weekend, with a test where results equaled the blast at Hiroshima. Undoubtedly, the regime of Kim Jong Il, expected little in the way of repercussions, rather, exactly what occurred: strong condemnation from the U.N. and U.S. President Barack Obama. Although the U.N. met in an emergency session, it is likely a strongly worded condemnation will result, and should any sanctions be imposed, without the cooperation of China, the status quo will remain the same.

In an article from the Boston Globe, Tuesday morning, spoke to the naiveté of the Obama administration regarding the belief that talks with the regime would produce results.

”The Obama Administration “came into office hopeful that an outreached hand would yield better results,” said Michael J. Green, former senior Asia advisor to President George W. Bush. “They are now in a much more sober and realistic mood (North Korea’s Leaders) mean it when they say they want to establish themselves as a nuclear weapons state.”

Further:

“The specialists also said the tests indicated that Obama’s entreaties for North Korea to return to international disarmament talks – including dangling the prospect of one-on-one talks with the United States – have failed to provide even a pause in the country’s nuclear ambitions.”

Iran had sent warships into the Gulf of Aden - a move seen as unprecedented and designed to show “its ability to confront any foreign threats.” Ahmadinejad has rejected the U.N.’s suggestion not to continue their nuclear program, and father, Ahmadinejad suggests a debate with U.S. President Barak Obama on “world problems and collective collaboration.”

In addition, after talks with Obama last week, Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu (Reuters) is defying “Obama on Israeli Settlement Freeze”. With over 50 percent of Israelis’ polled suggesting immediate strikes on Iran and Israel’s Defense Minister telling the nation to prepare for all-out war, it appears that the current U.S. foreign policy needs revisions in order to stabilize two rogue regimes and gain back the friendship of the only ally in the Middle East.

The term Paper Tiger refers to a regime that appears powerful, yet is actually ineffective, and was first used by the Chinese under Mao, specifically against the U.S. (source Dictionary Bablyon.com). Over the years it has been used to describe the United States on more than one occasion and under the leadership of more than one administration. That said, when candidate Barrack Obama spoke of talking with (with the intent of reasoning with) certain regimes, it was an immediate indication that the era of George W. Bush (seen as “No Paper Tiger”), was coming to an end. This set the stage for a multitude of tests for the new administration by these same countries (dubbed the Axis of Evil by Bush), to see just how ineffective or effective the new President may be - should the Obama administration continue with current policy, one can anticipate more aggressive behavior from both Iran and North Korea.

Unfortunately, this too is reminiscent of the Carter Administration’s many attempts at “peace” through negotiations, which resulted in Carter’s “critics” charging he had “lost control of the situation.” The defiance by America’s detractors came to a head when the Iranian Government under Ayatollah Khomeini (returned to power by Carter), took the U.S. Embassy and its staff hostage.
The infamous 3 A.M. call(s) are now coming fast and furious – for anyone with buyer’s remorse – this reminder:

Monday, May 25, 2009

Obama As Pragmatist – Yes We Can – Run out Of Money

In an interview Friday, May 23 between Steve Scully, Political Editor, C-SPAN and President Barack Obama questions ranged from the economy to appointments to the Supreme Court.
From The Chicago Sun Times comes an article by Lynn Sweet entitled “Obama defines his pragmatism for C-SPAN's Steve Scully”. There were two significant statements made by the President, one of which was picked up by a variety of news services immediately, while the other was – not.

Obama’s blatant: “We’re Out of Money” broke on the Drudge Report immediately, while the fact that the President's choice of a Supreme Court Justice appears to be the portion that interests most news outlets.

On Choosing a Supreme Court Justice:

"SCULLY: Is there a justice current or former that you look at as a role model, as kind of the characteristics that you want in a Supreme Court justice?
OBAMA: Well you know, I mean each justice I think brings their own qualities, and you know, there are some justices who are wonderful writers, even justices I don't agree with, Justice Scalia is a terrific writer, and makes really interesting arguments.
You have people like Judge – Justice O'Connor, who again, I might not have agreed with her on every issue, but you always had a sense that she was taking the law and seeing what the practical applications of the law in this case. She wasn't a grand theoretician, but she ended up having an enormous influence on the law as a whole.
And on the other hand there are Justices like Brennan or Marshall, who really focused on the broader sweep of history and came at a time during the Civil Rights movement, where they recognized the unique role that – the unique role that courts could play in breaking the political logjam that had locked out too many people in the political process.
And so, different times call for different justices, each justice has their own strengths as well as weaknesses. And what I just want to make sure of is that any justices I appoint are people who have not only the academic qualifications or intellectual capacity, but also the heart and the feel for how Americans are struggling in their day-to-day lives.
And also, an appreciation I think for how, even though, we live in new times there are some time tested principles embodied in our constitution that have to be respected.
SCULLY: Let me follow-up on that, because you could have 2 or 3 more appointments in the next couple of years.
OBAMA: Right.
SCULLY: Is that the imprint that you want on the Supreme Court?
OBAMA: I don't want to jump the gun. Obviously, nobody else has announced their retirements, but the criteria that I described, a strong intellectual grasp of the law, an appreciation for the timeless principles of the constitution, and a sense of common sense and compassion and empathy for ordinary Americans, so that everybody is heard. Those are all qualities that I think make for a great Supreme Court justice.
SCULLY: William Howard Taft served on the court after his presidency, would you have any interest in being on the Supreme Court?
OBAMA: You know, I am not sure that I could get through Senate confirmation."

It is apparent that the President feels a strict interpretation of the Constitution is not necessary, rather“empathy” for the American People – in other words, a perfect Obama Justice would peruse the Constitution and then, based upon the ideology of said Justice, render a decision based upon his or her own political point of view. This is otherwise known as “legislating from the bench” That aside, this portion of the interview is the one deemed ”most newsworthy.

In speaking about HealthCare reform and the costs:

"SCULLY: Yet, it all takes money. You know the numbers, $1.7 trillion debt, a national deficit of $11 trillion. At what point do we run out of money?
OBAMA: Well, we are out of money now. We are operating in deep deficits, not caused by any decisions we've made on health care so far. This is a consequence of the crisis that we've seen and in fact our failure to make some good decisions on health care over the last several decades."

Obama, in an attempt to sell his costly Health Care program, basically (paraphrasing) tells Scully that since the U.S. is out of money, why not print some more, because if we don’t implement Obama’s version of health care reform, we’ll be in worse shape 30 years down the road. After proclaiming the nation penniless, (pound foolish comes to mind), Obama notes that this is just “temporary” and indicates that in 30 years, the savings on health care reform will be in the trillions of dollars – $2 Trillion to be exact, which, when one looks at the current budget projections in trillions, is a drop in the proverbial bucket.

The balance of the interview is basic fluff, a question regarding David Axelrod (advisor to Obama and Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick), calling Obama “pragmatic”, replete with Obama’s explanation of pragmatism and lastly, a question on his family life, the endless magazine covers, ad nauseum.

The fact that the President of the United States is making fiscal decisions based on 30 year projections, while admitting that the country is currently, “out of money”, is beyond Carteresque. Unemployment is at a 25 year high, with no apparent end in sight, and as inflation has begun to increase, with projection reaching double digits on some commodities, the wherewithal to pay for any of these programs is in question as the tax base is quickly eroding. As the employed and the employers becoming increasingly extinct due to an unprecedented assault on private industry by this administration, the comparatively few state jobs and state-owned industries will be unable to sustain the debt. At what point, one wonders, will common sense begin to trump politically driven ideology?