Friday, December 23, 2011

Mr. One Percent

The Louisville Occupiers are upset because the city has told them that they have to take down their tents at Jefferson Park. The Occupiers have some legitimate grievances, but many of us do not take them very seriously because of their support for Mr. One Percent, Barack Obama. We cannot know for certain, but it is a fairly safe bet that most of the Occupiers voted for Obama and will vote for him again. This is completely irrational in light of their cause.
Who provides the majority of financial support for Obama's political campaigns? Answer: The One Percent. Who did Obama pick his economic team from? Answer: The One Percent. Who benefited most from Obama's bailouts and stimulus spending? Answer: The One Percent. Barack Obama is a poster boy for the One Percent. It is their interests that he is most committed to protecting. It is beyond understanding how the Occupiers cannot see what is so clear.
If the Occupiers are serious, job number one is getting rid of Barack Obama. Until they support that, the rest of the 99 percent cannot take them seriously.

Thursday, December 22, 2011

Neil nails it!

Wrapping Christmas presents to the sounds of Neil Young's Harvest album. Song is "I'd Love to Change the World". Lyrics are:

Tax the rich
Feed the poor
Until there are
no rich no more?

Even 70's hippies understand economics better than the current regime.

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Looking Ahead to KY-4 and Calling Hunter Bates

Few expected Geoff Davis to announce he was retiring from Congress this soon, but there is no surprise at the amount of interest in replacing him.  For Republicans, in particular,  KY-4 is a very attractive district, notwithstanding that Democrats still hold a registration advantage.

Davis's retirement must be causing plenty of East End Republicans to wish they'd moved from Jefferson County to Oldham County.  The voter registration for KY-3,  Jefferson County, makes it so unlikely that a Republican can win that it is a waste of resources to even contribute to a Republican there. Not so in KY-4.

In the inevitable Republican primary for the 4th Congressional District, Hunter Bates would be terriffic.  He is smart, humble, has a very strong faith and great political instincts. And he's a true conservative. He would be an outstanding Congressman.  I hope he runs; he would win and serve his district, Kentucky and the nation with distinction.

Monday, December 5, 2011

Trump Card

Donald Trump, of The Apprentice and monumental real estate bankruptcies fame, is set to moderate yet another Republican Presidential debate on December 27th. Now Donald Trump is a fun guy to watch, he has great bravado and the finest comb over on the planet, but having him as a moderator for a Presidential debate is taking the process into the realm of the absurd. Huntsman and Paul have sensibly already begged off on the invite, we will have to wait and see what other candidates bite.

We can just hear Trump's response to a weak answer from one of the candidates: "You're fired!" When pop culture icons become Presidential debate moderators, we know we have abandoned any sense of seriousness about the matter. Who will be the next Republican Presidential debate moderator, Madonna?

Friday, December 2, 2011

Trying to Enthuse About Romney

The brilliant Charles Krauthammer has done what no one heretofore has been able to do:  convince me that the Republican nominee must be Mitt Romney for the sake of our country.

Krauthammer compares the strengths and weaknesses of Romney against the latest non-Romney, Newt Gingrich, and concludes with evident reluctance that it must be Mitt -- and this without even mentioning Newt's personal baggage.

Listen to how Krauthammer distills the difference between the two front-runners:

Two ideologically problematic finalists: One is a man of center-right temperament who has of late adopted a conservative agenda. The other is a man more conservative by nature but possessed of an unbounded need for grand display that has already led him to unconservative places even he is at a loss to explain, and that as president would leave him in constant search of the out-of-box experience — the confoundedly brilliant Nixon-to-China flipperoo regarding his fancy of the day, be it health care, taxes, energy, foreign policy, whatever.

I recently spoke with someone who served in Congress with Gingrich who described Gingrich as a "high wire act."  Even in the Republican caucus, members held their breath, not knowing what Gingrich would do next -- but certain that it would make for big headlines.

With Romney, on the other hand, we know what we are getting: a moderate Northeastern Republican a la Nelson Rockefeller.  We might not like it, but we know what to expect.

As Krauthammer points out, it is Gingrich's "need for the grand display" based on his own certainty of his brilliance -- his narcissism -- that makes Gingrich a dangerous bet for conservatives. That's assuming he could get elected, which Krauthammer doubts given the stench of lobbying for Freddie Mae and Mac that accompanies Gingrich.

My sense of foreboding about Romney has nothing to do with his character, his intellect or his religion.  I just fear that he will join the growing list of "moderates" that Republicans keep nominating in a vain attempt to appeal to independents:  Gerald Ford; George H.W. Bush after we "read his lips"; Bob Dole; John McCain.  Mitt Romney fits more comfortably in that list than he does in the much shorter list:  George W. Bush; Ronald Reagan, who made no apologies about their adherence to conservatism and were rewarded with election.

It is unfortunate that the choice has come down to Mitt vs. Newt.  Mitch Daniels could have won this election. He would have been a superb president. Perhaps he still will be, one day.

But here is the danger.  Even if a Mitch Daniels or Paul Ryan gets elected in 2016, if Obama has been reelected, this country may no longer be recognizable in 2016.  It will be too late.

You play the hand you’re dealt. This is a weak Republican field with two significantly flawed front-runners contesting an immensely important election. If Obama wins, he will take the country to a place from which it will not be able to return (which is precisely his own objective for a second term).

Every conservative has thus to ask himself two questions: Who is more likely to prevent that second term? And who, if elected, is less likely to unpleasantly surprise?