We've Been Shrugged

C'mon Grandma, Take One for The Team

2010-01-12T21:55:00.000-07:00

On the 24th of December a dear Uncle suddenly passed away. Ironically while many of his family was enjoying The Christmas Carol. Just like Marley. A little bit unnerving if you ask me.

After the shock and sadness registered, a practical thought went through my head. Any chance we could keep the old fellow on ice until the first? Not that I wanted to get through Christmas before having to deal the misfortune. It is that the estate tax goes to zero for one brief year - 2010.

Now if only we could get Grandma to time her passing accordingly.

How have we gotten to this sad state of affairs ...where families are found uncomfortably wondering if their aged relatives couldn't time their demise to fall between 1/1/10 and 12/31/10.

Blame it on the Democrats. Who never saw an asset they didn't want to tax.

A brief history of the death tax (estate tax to the dems) is warranted.

More to come....

Jarid Polis - and the idiocy of liberal reasoning and hypocrisy

"Without the estate tax, you in effect will have an aristocracy of the
wealthy, which means you pass down the ability to command the resources of the nation based on heredity rather than merit"

Warren Buffet - proof that liberalism is a form of senility.

"American is and should be a meritocracy"

The Kennedy's - proof that we don't need an estate tax to force equalization. Eventually hubris and idiot offspring will squander the wealth.

Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus proving that it's not societal consideration, its all about the money grab..."it is embarrassing that the Democrat-controlled Congress could allow the tax to lapse."

Bill Gates showing that even he is afraid of the Government - trying to appease the anti-trust crusaders in Congress that he is a team player..."we must acknowledge that the person who accumulates wealth in this country was not able to do that independently...society has a just claim on our fortunes, and that claim goes by the name estate tax." He knows government can do a lot more harm to him today, than to confiscate only half his wealth after he is gone.

Pugilistic Government

2009-05-20T13:53:00.004-06:00

My career as a pugilist was short and not sweet. As a relatively good athlete and generally tough guy I thought boxing would be a fun sport to pick up.

The ivy league-like school I attended frowned upon this type of boorish behavior. It was one of those kinds of colleges that didn't like ROTC on campus either. But there was one tough old coach who thought he'd teach us tassel-loafer types a little street smarts.

Alas, the enthusiasm and excitement from the training room did not transfer into the ring. Skipping rope, shadow boxing, working the speed and heavy bags seems all very glamorous in a rough and tumble sort of way. A group of white collar kids from the suburbs playing inner city thugs.

But the ring was a very different environment - basically moving from the training room to the ring was like moving from theory into reality. All five in our boxing class had to face the one true boxer in the group. A strapping 190 pounder that really did grow up in a tough Philly (really!) blue collar neighborhood. His athletic and pugilistic prowess gained him a golden glove, some money and a scholarship to our rather stuffy and pompous school.

He was told by the coach to go easy on us. Not to completely destroy our confidence in the first encounter. In fact, the first round we were allowed to hit away - body shots only - with him just on defense. The second round evolved into a more realistic situation, although it was more of a cat and mouse approach - he the cat toying with me the mouse. Third and final round the bell rang and it was a real match. I quickly discovered those boxing helmets don't do much to cushion the blows - it only kept our pretty faces from getting cut.

30 seconds into the third round I stepped squarely into a crushing roundhouse - leading all the way with my face. I had never been hit that hard before. Having played football I had had my bell rung on occasion, but that sport offered stout plastic helmets and the opportunity to come off the field after every play and gather your thoughts. I must say the blow did not transmit the level of pain I had anticipated. In fact, there was no attended pain - probably a result of my brain shutting down all synapses in a move of self preservation.

What occurred next was odd. An out of body experience of sorts. I was aware I had been dealt a stunning blow - but the warning indicator of searing pain was absent, something had obliterated the flight or fight response. My arms simply slumped to my sides, and I stood there staring directly at my opponent unable to react. As I watched, detached from my body, I saw several more blows land unimpeded around my head. After several more shots, a weak signal did emit from my brain to my legs suggesting they move away from the action. Unfortunately, the message to the legs was garbled - instead of demanding that they turn and run, or please God buckle and allow me to collapse to the canvas, they simply went into a slow reverse. My opponent , no doubt by now enjoying the chance to teach one of the soft suburban boys a lesson, pounded me into the corner. But alas, my legs would not give way and the bell was 90 seconds away from getting me out of this mess.

Fortunately the coach jumped in and stopped the fight. Checking my vision and asking a few basic questions it was clear to him - this fight was over. Maybe it was the fact that I kept staring at his second head that gave him that clue. Or that my response to his questions about days of the week or the number of digits on his hand was - "Mother would you please bring me my slippers" - that had him worried.

For the next two days I found it hard to study or concentrate on much - an annoying buzzing and cotton-headiness followed me around. The coach demoted me back down to just gym work after that. He told me he I deserved the one hour credit for the class due to the beating I absorbed, but he was worried another jaunt in the ring might reduce my future career options to selling pencils on a street corner.

So what does this story about my pathetic boxing career have to do with this blog that focuses on political and economic issues? Well let me say that after several months of the Obama administration I'm feeling the same sensations I did during my brief tour of the ring.

The election cycle leading up to Obama's victory was one of great confusion, disorientation and fear of what was happening in our country. Not just the concern of a socialist taking over as President, but the melt down of the economy, the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, mass governmental spending, stimulus and interjection into the economy by Congress and the previous administration had us all reeling. Then in the fall as the economy entered a free fall, the reality set in that this was not going to be an ordinary recession.

All this left us dazed, confused and worn out just as Obama entered office. With his activist approach and Rohm Emmanuel stating that we can't waste a good crisis the race to socialism and big government control has been stunning, swift and unrelenting - much like the blows that kept landing on my head many years ago in the ring. As a nation we seem to be experiencing the same out of body phenomenon - where we can see what is happening, realize the damage it is doing, but being so stunned that we can't seem to do anything about the beating.

Deficits tripling overnight to $1.8 trillion (and we know that will be revised upward), take overs of banks, insurance companies, auto makers, healthcare - boom, boom, boom - all in rapid succession. When is Obama going to let up? Who is left to stop him?

I keep hoping there is a wise old coach in the corner who is about to jump in and put a stop to this - because once again I don't think the bell is going to save us. Or when it finally rings, the damage will be irreparable and we will all be a nation of pencil sellers on the corner.

Arrogance, Hubris or a Man in over his Head?

2009-05-13T12:06:00.003-06:00

As noted in a previous post Obama has exhibited a disturbing tendency to make fun of others, put people down and act in a way that is not becoming of a President. For now we will give him the benefit of the doubt - it must be hard to actually be President and not just play one on the campaign trail. And no doubt if every word we uttered was recorded we'd all have have egg on our face from time to time.

But someone has got to tell Obama that the President must be held to a higher standard and that protocol and decorum matter.

Obama reminds me of a cocky, immature ivy league kid who really thinks he is smarter and better than the rest of us. A guy who was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple. We know that isn't true with Obama, he started out with a lot of challenges, but it certainly appears he has adopted an east coast, ivy-league, blue blood demeanor.

Cheap shot #1 - Hitting an old lady while she is down - Making up stories about Nancy Reagan (Wasn't it Hillery Clinton that was speaking to Eleanor Roosevelt?)

Cheap shot #2 - Special Olympics/Special President

Cheap behavior #3 - Laughing at Others

Poor Protocol #4 - President's don't pick up lint

Poor Protocol #5 - Sure he trapped Obama with his ploy but Chavez played him like a fiddle, and Obama didn't have to grin like a freshman pledge. Where is the secret service when you need them?

True Measure of the Man

2009-05-13T11:29:00.004-06:00

Obama has been President long enough to give us insight into his thinking and character.

For those who were listening during the campaign he was clear about the policies he would pursue. In his defense we can't say he lied to us about his campaign promises.

But his race to the Presidency was a tightly choreographed branding campaign in which the new and improved politician's philosophy and temperament where carefully guarded. There were rarely any fax paus, although occasionally a glimpse of the real Obama slipped past his handlers - "clinging to guns and religion" were words that were uttered when he was among a comfortable group of San Francisco supporters and he thought there was no controlling recording authority, in the paraphrased words of Saint Al Gore.

Now as the scales are falling off the eyes of many a fuzzy picture of the man is starting to develop sharper edges.

Granted the Presidency is a large and weighty job. All new Presidents go through a learning curve, or at least an acclimation period. If we think back on the first two years of Clinton the parallels are similar. In fact, Time magazine had a cover showing the incredible shrinking President and asked if Clinton was even relevant.

Some Presidents came to the office with a great deal more experience, both politically and from a well-rounded life perspective. Ronald Reagan had a long career in another field, had been active in unions, spent time in the military and Governed our largest state. Bush #41 also had deep experience in business and politics before assuming the mantle. But even their early days required some necessary adjustments.

One hopes this newest President is waking up to the realization that every gesture (bowing to a Saudi Prince, laughing with a third world strong man, smirking and laughing at inappropriate humor), every word, every initiative will be watched closely, given intense scrutiny and will have tangible impact - negative and positive.

We pray that he grasps the fact that at the extremes he holds the power of life and death in his hands. With his word three pirates are dead in milliseconds. With his words our best and brightest throw themselves into harms way in Iraq, Afghanistan and other hot spots across the globe. Certainly at an intellectual level he understands his words mean things and that he wields incredible power. But what is not clear is that at a deep emotional and visceral level these realities have sunk in. They will. At that time we will see the true character and mettle of the man. He will age quickly like all Presidents do as the weight and responsibility of the job places a a heavy burden on his shoulders.

But until that day it is disconcerting to see him basking in the celebrity and coolness of the job. Sure he was funny and hip and cool on the Jay Leno show, but in these times we need more from our President than to be an entertaining guest on a late night show.

One greatness of America is that people from humble beginnings and challenged circumstances can latch on to the American promise of equal opportunity (not equal results) and rise to the top in their chosen field. When men like Clinton and Obama beats the odds we should give them a moment to laugh, pinch themselves and luxuriate in the perks of the job (think Air Force One). But then it is time to buckle down and focus on the job of preserving America as the great beacon of hope in a tough world.

Clinton was a lucky man. When he took office it was a rare time of peace and prosperity. He had the wind at his back with the dividend from the end of the cold war. The economy had gone through a small dip, but was gearing up for a strong run, and he was fortunate to have worthy opponents in Congress that kept in check many of his most damaging policies. As a country we had the good fortune that a rookie, good old boy bubba president came into power during a hiatis from major chaos - under the surface problems were brewing, but for the average citizen the world was not so dangerous and daily life was not dire.

In 2009 we don't have any margin for error.

Physically Obama is thin - probably from playing basketball and smoking cigarettes. But he is also thin in terms of experience: Life, work and politically. If one goes to the business social network LinkedIn you can find his resume. Not only does he have large gaps in his work tenure, but it is striking how limited his span of experience is and how narrow the focus. His world view is skewed by ivy league schools and political involvement.

What has been disconcerting are the number of social blunders, missteps and inappropriate cheap shots he has exhibited since he came out of the campaign bubble and has to operate in the unscripted real world. If you think he got an anxiety attack when secret service threatened to take away his blackberry (aka crackberry) - take a look at the panic in his eyes when the teleprompter goes on the fritz.

A condescending attitude, sense of arrogance and know-it-all hubris has cropped up too many times since his victory in November. Maybe these episodes are just early inning jitters, youthful exuberance (and it's attendant cockiness) from pulling off an unbelievable upset, or a man who is in over his head trying to pretend he knows what he is doing.

Time will reveal if this is the true character of the man or someone finding their sea-legs. But please someone whisper into Obama's ear and let him know we don't have time to spare - this ship is rocking badly.

American Exceptionalism

2009-05-12T08:33:00.005-06:00

Hugh Hewitt, Bill Bennett and Dennis Prager brought civility, humor, insight and wisdom to over 3,000 in the Denver area last night at their Obama first 100 days event.

Former Senator Bill Armstrong rounded out the outstanding presence on the podium. Besides Prager's memorable and self-deprecating high school basketball story there was a great deal of substance to discuss and ponder.

No one mentioned the words American Exceptionalism, but had they I'm sure the crowd would have applauded heartily - understanding exactly what that means and being proud of the good American has done around the world for millions. As Dennis Prager said, "I don't want to transform American, it is the great hope for the world - improve it yes, transform it no."

American Exceptionalism does not say that America is perfect or has never made significant mistakes. It is also not a pompous, condescending, arrogant moniker. It simply states that there is something about the American experiment that is different than any other nation before.

My guess is that if 3,000 Obama supporters had filled the Douglas County auditorium last night they would have booed or at least cringed at the mention of American Exceptionalism.

In five minutes Dennis Prager summarizes better than any college professor could in four years of instruction (as if a college professor today would herald America) what it is that makes American unique. Watch this segment on The American Trinity and pass it along to others.

Big government makes people mean

2009-05-11T19:42:00.002-06:00

As government gets bigger and takes more and more responsibility for our daily lives we as a nation get less involved, less sensitive and more willing to look the other way when our neighbor is in need - in other words we get meaner.

America is wealthy enough to provide a safety net to those who are truly in need. Unfortunately for many we have allowed that safety net to turn into a hammock.

Due to government the fabric of our society is being unraveled one thread at a time. When people are in need today we have been trained to turn first to government to soften the blow. Even conservatives are being lulled into this mode of thinking.

Sure it is easier to outsource care and "compassion" to a government agency. When your brother loses his job, we ask, "have you filed for unemployment?". When your elderly parent is ill isn't it easier to let medicare provide help. When a neighbor is struggling with parenting we call social services.

The government should only be the choice of last resort - for those who are clearly without any other place to turn. Before we ask big brother for a handout families, churches, neighbors, non-profits should step up and shoulder the burden.

The blessing one receives caring for someone in need feeds the soul and strengthens the bond among individuals and communities. When we let government grow too large and take over this role we become less caring, less involved, smaller and meaner as a people.

This is not your father's Democrat

2009-05-06T01:33:00.005-06:00

It is often said of the military that they fight the last war. That the strategies and tactics that worked in previous engagements are utilized in a new theater until they realize the game has changed.

Peggy Noonen, who has been wobbling back and forth between despair and hope, praise and condemnation of Obama writes beautifully in her recent Wall Street Journal op-ed - "His presentation was low-key, authoritative, and had the look and feel of moderation. When you can give this impression while some of your decisions—for instance, on the legitimate cost and reach of government—are not, actually, moderate, you are demonstrating a singular political talent.

He is subtle and likes to kill softly. As such, he is something new on the political scene, which means he will require something new from his opponents, including, first, patience.

I am wondering once again if Republicans in Washington fully understand what they are up against."

It is true the Republicans don't know what they are up against. As Obama gets his balance and pace it is going to get tougher. He is not like Bill Clinton - a good old boy slickster. He is cold, calculated and a bit scary. As Noonan says he has a singular political talent - able to pull off a sleight of hand like no one we have seen for a long time.

He can say that government must be lean and find at least $100 million in cost savings, while at the same time tripling the deficit in one year - and no one laughs.

He is the same guy who says he wants to reduce his "holdings" and claims he wants to get the government out of the private sector as fast as possible. While at the same time trying to take over health care and making it tough for banks to get out of the TARP tar baby mess. How is it no one raises an eyebrow at this incongruity?

Perhaps he is telling the truth and wants to get out of certain industries as fast as possible. It could be he doesn't want to mess with the small potatoes of the auto industry and insurance sector. Those don't have anywhere the same level of clout and control over the populace as do health care and banking. And there is the sticky issue of dealing with unions that are helping sink the auto dinosaurs.

Now we know why Obama picked Joe Biden and Robert Gibbs to be on his team - to keep the laughs and incredulous looks focused on them, and away from him.

This is different, and the Republicans had better wake up soon and realize they are fighting the previous war.

The Long Voyage in Circles

2009-05-06T00:29:00.005-06:00

The New York Times was in full measure today. David Brooks giving the Republicans a false play book in his op-ed saying "If the Republicans are going to rebound, they will have to re-establish themselves as the party of civic order."

Oh, that's right. Looking down from my swanky upper east side condo I can see those rascally Republican's throwing molotov cocktails again in Central Park. Don't you just hate it when they do that!

"First, they will have to stylistically decontaminate their brand. That means they will have to find a leader who is calm, prudent, reassuring and reasonable." Does he really mean that style trumps substance. And I guess the Republican's need to see if Obama has a slightly less liberal brother they can co-opt into the party.

He goes on to state that there are two theories of civic order - as if order is the highest virtue. Stalin maintained civic order. Ghandi promoted civil disobedience. The founding fathers of our country claimed in the Declaration of Independance "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it". Let's not fall for this false argument. What Brooks really is saying is - Look (Obama's favorite word when not on the telepromter), we Democrats are in power and we want everyone else to be well mannered and not to rock the boat. That is what civic order means to him.

Finally he goes on to say that the Republicans "will have to explain that there are two theories of civic order. There is the liberal theory, in which teams of experts draw up plans to engineer order whenever problems arise. And there is the more conservative vision in which government sets certain rules, but mostly empowers the complex web of institutions in which the market is embedded."

I'm not so sure the liberal version works all that well. Teams of experts managing by consensus from high atop the ivory dome (analogous to the lofty theories of the ivory tower) doesn't sound like a recipe for success. Correct me if I'm wrong but Warren Buffett and his team of billionaire guru's missed the entire market meltdown. And he makes a ton of money from the reinsurance industry. Don't you think he should have seen it coming.

And not to pick just on the liberals. Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke didn't engender much confidence during the waning days of the Bush administration. Do we really want to take David Brook's advice and re-build based on experts like Timothy Geithner who can't even get his taxes paid on time? Besides he hasn't even been able to fill enough jobs at the Treasury to assemble a team, let alone any experts.

The final claim he makes is that both these visions now exist in the Democrat party and the Republican's are left out in the cold without a clue. But show me where in the Democrat leadership there is anyone who believes the role of government is to be a passive rule enforcer?

I'm afraid if all the Republican's do is find a nice calm amiable leader and try to maintain peace and harmony they will be on a long voyage in circles.

Respectfully spitting on Kemp's Grave

2009-05-05T23:48:00.006-06:00

Now that three great conservative leaders are gone – Ronald Reagan, William F. Buckley & Jack Kemp – revisionist history hour is in full bloom. Bob Herbert in the New York Times pulls the old: he was a well meaning guy, but….now that he’s gone – and can’t make a rebuttal - let me point out what a nice idiot he was trick.

Herbert opens his column with a lame backhanded slap - pointing out the irony that in 1965 Kemp and Joe Namath played football against each other while all other poor young saps were being drafted to go to Vietnam. But Joe and Jack didn’t have to worry. Football injuries made them unfit for service, inferring though that they were healthy enough to play ball. Talk about a cheap shot! That calls for a 15 yard penalty for un-sportsman like writing.

He goes on to metaphorically slam Kemp to the turf – “He (Kemp) had two very big ideas for his party. One was terrific, spot on. The other couldn’t have been more boneheaded. The G.O.P. being the G.O.P. rejected the good idea and went hog wild on the boneheaded one.” You would think from this sentence and Herbert’s effusive praise and criticism for Kemp, that Jack was for global warming (or using the new politically correct hedging term – climate change) and loved communism. Sorry, Herbert claims Kemp was the one lonely voice in the nasty, neanderthal, vindictive G.O.P. in favor of supporting minorities, and horror of horrors he was for tax cuts. And only two ideas? Couldn’t Herbert have done a little more research to realize that Kemp brought forth much more than just two ideas in all his years of service?

Herbert goes on to state, “Working people were told they should sign onto this craziness (supply side tax cuts)...As every scheme imaginable was developed to bolster the fortunes of the rich, ordinary people were left in the humiliating position of waiting for some of the goodies to trickle down to them.”

Maybe providing goods and services to those who could afford them, or obtaining a job from a rich person is the humiliating position he is referring to. I believe Joe Louis said “I never got a job from a poor guy.” Maybe the rich people he is referring to are not the liberal darlings such as George Clooney, or the Google Billionaires. Yup, it must be really demeaning to be the pilot for the Google 757 and 767 party planes, or maintain Clooney's Italian mansion. Give me one of those jobs and I'd be happy to be trickled upon!

No, we all agree it is much less humiliating for the ordinary” Joe” to be in the position of waiting for some goodies to trickle down to them from Uncle Sam. After all, the Government is never condescending, controlling, demeaning, nor does it ever force someone to jump through arbitrary hoops to get something from their goodie tray.

Trust me, having had to beg for favor from a U.S. government agent at the U.S. embassy in a foreign country (protected behind 3 inches of bullet proof Plexiglas paid for by my tax dollars) I didn’t feel demeaned or abused. Right! Maybe the relief I felt being granted a small favor at the mercy of some bureaucrat masked the feeling of being held hostage to the whims of a low level government official. Please sir, may I have some more?

Thanks Mr. Herbert. We certainly appreciate this lovely twisted wreath you laid at Jack Kemp’s grave.

KowTowing to the Robbers

2009-04-29T19:30:00.013-06:00

I bumped into a good friend at the airport in D.C. He is a high level executive from another city.

The purpose of his visit? To host a delegation of business and community leaders to lobby (aka professional begging) members of Congress for "investments" in their city.

He told me the protocol for meeting the Senators and Congressmen. The pomp and circumstance around the staging. The air of importance these elected officials had. How this group of competent, hard working business and community leaders were made to wait like school children outside the principals office while "important" business was being conducted. Important to the particular Senator who was breaking the news he was switching parties to save his sorry old, worn out political career from the voters who want to see him retired.

All self serving, all for their own self elevation at the expense of those of us who fund their coffers.

The problem with this picture is that these elected officials are indeed incredibly important and do hold the balance of lives and careers in their hands. Why? It is not particularly related to their intelligence or acumen in a specific field. It is not due to the value they have contributed to society. It is not due to the wealth they have created or the jobs developed. For many elected officials this is the greatest and most powerful job they will ever have. Any wonder why guys like Arlen Specter will do anything to hang on to it.

No. They are critically important because they have a ton of our money. They held a tax gun to our head (and that gun is getting bigger) and demanded a huge share of the fruits of our labor. They want 40% of the sweat beads that form on our brow from hard and honest work.

That is how the game is played. They demand our money put it through the bureaucratic machine, from which 20, 30, 40% (more ?) is wasted in the process. Then they tell us to come a-calling, on hands and knees and beg them to return our fair share of what is left.

It is not that big government totally wastes money or just throws it down the rat hole. No they take it, waste a big percentage for "shipping and handling" and then funnel the rest back out to us. Allocated as they see fit, and to whom they want to reward or punish. Or they dangle it in the air like a giant pinata and force us to go through gyrations that they deem important before allowing us to take a whack at it.

Some government projects are actually of value and make a meaningful investment in the future of our country - interstate highway system for example. But the cost and inefficiency is present in all government endeavors. And unfortunately a majority of their projects or programs are not of value or could be done far more efficiently in the private sector.

This is social engineering through the tax code. And it is why a flat tax will never pass. Tax collection and distribution is as much about power and control as it is about raising revenue to fund government functions.

It is no different than if I assembled 20 people in a room forcibly extracted $2000 from them ($100 each) put $600 through a shredder and then unequally doled out the remaining $1400 based on my whims or who I liked or disliked.

In a brutal recession everyone is cutting back. Making do with less. Making tough decisions on how to allocate limited resources. Everyone but government that is. What do we hear from them? "We must make up the budget shortfall". But they never look at the spending side of that equation, only the revenue side. "We must fund critical programs" they tell us. If we cut back babies will be thrown into the streets, criminals will run unfettered through police absent cities. News flash - this is smoke and mirrors, scare tactics. Another news flash, government considers every program critical. Heaven help us if we have to reduce funding to NPR!

Government is fundamentally and structurally incapable of cutting costs. It is like a cancer that only grows larger when you eat well and provide your body with nutrients. We have to treat government the same way we treat that type of cancer. We have starve the beast. Cut off its blood supply. That is the only way to bring this monster under control and whittle it back to its proper size and function.

And by starving the beast we can humble a few of these congressmen by making them less important and less relevant as our big wad of our cash they are waving in front our faces gets reduced to hand full of coins.

Law of Big Organizations

2009-04-29T10:16:00.016-06:00

Sitting in the heart of Washington D.C. with the events of yesterday still swirling about the political intelligentsia - Arlen Specter's defection to the democrats - makes this heartlander realize how uncoupled they are from the real world.

Certainly the magnitude of having a filibuster proof senate is significant in terms of the damage that can now be done in rapid order. No more nasty republican speed bumps in our way! Listening to Specter, Biden and Obama all patting each other on the back indicates they don't realize they are just re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

Our ever expanding government (Barak to Michelle - "Honey, I grew the government") has hit the iceberg and is taking on water. Unfortunately it will take a long time before anyone on the bridge sounds the alarm.

When an outside the beltway-er visits DC it is clear to see that the majority in this city have a dark ages view of the world outside the political realm - that the world is flat and drops of the edge just a few miles past the beltway. Almost everyone in DC is living off the teat of the mother pig. They forgot how the world truly operates. DC is a false parallel universe.

Asking an entrenched beltway denizen how the real world works is like asking the typical 3rd grader where bread comes from. Sad to say but most 3rd graders will say bread comes from the grocery store - with no knowledge that at its origin a seed was planted, grew into wheat, was harvested and ground into bread.

DC'ers think money flows in from the rest of the country to support the critically important work of the government. But like the 3rd grader they have no real idea or concept of how that money was created or earned. It just shows up by fiat. They have no clue how hard most people work creating value in the free market that then translates into the money they skim from those producers.

As the center of our world shifts to an unabashed big government approach it is important to try and understand why this current administration feels this is the best approach for the country. At best, they truly believe that socialism and equal distribution of wealth is fair and humane. At worst, it is a pure ego driven power grab. Somewhere in the middle is just lack of real world experience and dumb arrogance.

Why is it they feel that government can better allocate the resources and wealth of this country than individuals. They should study big companies such as Cisco or Oracle that are masters at acquiring and integrating smaller companies. Why would industry leaders with the financial resources such as Cisco or Oracle pay huge sums to acquire small companies? It is because they realize that at a certain size all organizations start losing their ability to be nimble, quick, adaptive and innovative. They may have the pure weight, heft, resources and momentum to own a large share of their market - but they realize they have lost the hunger, passion, desperation, focus, drive of small organizations that must innovate or die.

So while they have the infrastructure and inertia that allows them to dominate certain markets, they are inefficient, set in their ways and their people more interested in preserving what they have as opposed to creating new paradigms.

Look at General Motors. They have been sliding towards bankruptcy and extinction for years. They have been making poor decisions and squandering resources for decades. But their size, momentum and resources built up in their growth phase can sustain them for a very long time.

It was Bill Gates that discovered at MicroSoft that when any project team got above 200 people it became cumbersome and ineffective. To keep a big company operating successfully it has to be broken down into smaller, more accountable self-directed units. This is the antithesis of what we see in government. They are the poster child for big organizations. The key problem though is they have no competition, nor market pressures that eventually force them to improve or get displaced by competitors. Certainly we can choose to not re-elect politicians, but the bureaucrats and bureaucracies stay behind in perpetuity. The free market isn't always pretty, but iron sharpens iron, and in the long run we as a society are richer and better off due to competition.

Just because government workers are pure and not tainted by the evils of the profit motive (or so some claim) doesn't mean they are not motivated by other vices such as pride, ego, empire building, power,etc. They are just as likely to be corrupted by outside forces and just as likely to make dumb mistakes. The rub is that without the self correcting forces of the free market there in no pressure to change. When businesses mess up, they lose value and may go under. When government messes up, it stays in place, usually grows and gets additional funding. After all most politicians tell us the reason a program failed to deliver on its promises was that the funding wasn't enough - "We just need to spend more to finally fix the problem."

As Reagan said, "government that governs the least, governs the best."

Large bureaucratic centralized planning never works - not for big companies, not for big government. Yet with the desire for change and panic of an economic downturn, a great majority have hitched tier wagons to the ethereal promise that big brother can do a much better job taking care of of us than we can do on our own.

Play ball

2009-03-27T10:54:00.000-06:00

As an avid baseball fan I was very interested in reading Bruce Weber’s book “As They See ’Em”

While the typical fan follows the ball, the true student of the game takes time to watch what all the players are doing. Baseball is a ballet of activity occurring across the entire field.

Even the most ardent aficionados of the game rarely watch the men in Blue - the umpires. Bruce Weber's book sheds fascinating light on an integral part of the game - the regulatory aspect if you will.

If you attend youth games it is not unusual to see one umpire running the game from behind the plate. Do they miss calls from that vantage point? Sure. But generally the game still works. As you move up the rungs two or three umpires is more common. At the major league level "blue" consists of a team of four, with spikes (pun-intended) up to six for the playoffs.

The amazing thing is how a good umpire crew, regardless if it is one or six, blends into the background. Unless you are specifically focused on them they fade into the background, only emerging on key calls or to engage in a shouting match with the manager. If you want to watch masters at work, spend a few innings at a major league game watching the field umpires to see how they move, where they position themselves, and how they regulate the game while not interfering with it.

That is how good government should operate. It's role should be limited, fixed, subtle and part of the background. Government, like umpires, should be there to ensure fair competition, maintain the rule of law, protect players and fans and provide a balanced interpretation when the call is close. Fundamentally government should be small, constrained and know its proper place.

If one applies a baseball analogy our current government is like a crew of umpires run amok. First they expanded to 14 umpires on the field - outnumbering the players. Then they begin to over-regulate, making calls on plays that should have been left alone. Due to their sheer numbers they began to interfere with the players - blocking vision, bumping into the players, getting hit by the ball.

Somewhere along the line an "activist" umpire emerged. He decided that the New York Yankees have an unfair advantage. To even out the game, the Yankee now are required to throw four strikes to get a batter out - walks are issued on three balls. If the pitcher even comes close to the batter with a pitch it is an automatic base. When a steal is attempted by the Yankees an umpires grabs the back of their belt and is pulled, skidding down the base path, in order to give the opposing catcher a better chance to throw them out. Finally it goes so far that the intrusive umpires decide they understand the game better, banish the players to the dugout and start making the plays.

Ridiculous? Certainly. If this ludicrous scenario played out in baseball the fans would strike in protest demanding the umpires reduce their numbers and return to their original role. Therefore, when big government keeps expanding, interfering with our lives and taking on roles for which it is ill suited it leaves us with little recourse but to aggressively fight back and push the politicians back into the narrow role our founders intended.

Come On Charlie Brown...just one more kick

2009-03-24T04:00:00.000-06:00

Come on Wall Street, trust us. Really, we are your friends.

We need your help to get our economic plan out of the ditch. Come on big bankers, don't try to raise private funds to pay back your TARP money so quickly. Those strings aren't attached that tightly to your wallets, are they?

We promise not to confiscate your bonuses or excess profits if you help take these nasty, toxic assets off our hands and somehow through American ingenuity find a way to make money in the process.

Really, we want the economy to improve and America to be strong again. Because only then will be be able to sneak past all of you in the quiet of the night and enact our radical plans to socialize everything that's not bolted down. Well, actually the bolt business seems in need of a little government oversight as well.

Don't you know, it takes a strong economy and healthy capital base to create enough momentum so we socialists can draw down on all that hard work.

So Charlie Brown, you can trust old Lucy and Timmy and Barry. We promise not to pull the football out from under you this time. Oh, but we can't guarantee what ole Nancy and Barney and Topher might do. But don't worry, they're just that fun loving gang from the peanut gallery. They need a strong economy as well to pay for those jets and subsidized loans.

Political Aikido

2009-03-24T03:28:00.000-06:00

We have just witnesses the most amazing display of political Aikido ever seen in American.

Aikido, the Japanese martial art, is known for its manipulation - blending with the motion of the attacker and redirecting the energy of the attack. This requires very little physical energy (or in the case of Team Obama & the Demoquacks - little mental energy) and leaves ones opponent in a disoriented daze.

While it is hard to determine if Obama is a socialist, someone just getting his sea legs, or simply incompetent, one thing is certain - he bobs and weaves with the best of them.

How else could a $ Trillion fiasco, and a bumbling bailout be spun around so quickly that the nation took its eyes off the real source of our anger and focused it on the penny ante AIG bogus bonus brouhaha? Just as the lynch mob was descending on the White House, Obama sidestepped the mob, spun them deftly leveraging Mr. Leno's platform, and sent the pitch fork yielding rabble-rousers after the Frankenstein AIG monster.

Only a master of Political Aikido could have executed such a deft maneuver. The only problem is it is us - the average tax payer - who is on the receiving end of this swift kick.

President Fudd

2009-03-18T11:11:00.000-06:00

With apologies to the folks over at Warner Brothers and Looney Tunes (a most fitting moniker for what we see unfolding in Washington), I can almost hear Barney Frank yelling out in his best Elmer Fudd voice at AIG CEO Liddy, "come back here with all that money you little stinkers."

Obama telepromted today that the AIG bonuses are a "disgraceful waste of taxpayer dollars". I'll tell you what is a disgraceful waste of taxpayer dollars - How about $2 trillion of government spending that will be thrown down the rat hole? If $165 million is such a disgrace why not cut 2% from the 8,600 earmarks included in the omnibus spending bill. That would eliminate $160 million from that bill. So it is a wash. I know it is tough to cut that kind of money out of all that pork. After all it is hard work to get those earmarks inserted into a bill. It amounts to a reduction of 172 earmarks. So the lawmakers should all gather around a daisy and play "he loves me, he loves me not" and continue until each member of congress gives up .3 of an earmark. That is not even a full earmark reduction per member of congress. Maybe they can call it giving up an earlobe to make the reduction sound less painful.

A more disgraceful waste of taxpayer dollars is the money laundering scheme AIG has become for the politicians. I was wondering how they could drop $170 billion on one company and still have it clinging to life support. Well, now it looks like AIG was just a big funnel to allow the administration and congress to shove money out the door to all sorts of needy recipients. The only good news of this AIG bail out is that it makes Bernie Madoff look like an amateur - for which he is no doubt thankful.

What did we expect when government cranked up the printing press. Efficiency, effectiveness, solutions? Expecting government to effectively run the economy and fine tune the markets is like expecting a brain surgeon to operate successfully with a chain saw.

Let's put this all into perspective. $165 million is 1/10 of 1 percent of the total amount given to AIG. If you were a mutual fund that would be a pretty efficient fee load. No, this is not a disgrace; it is just a smoke screen to let Obama take the spotlight off his economic ineptitude and wasteful spending of such a magnitude it makes AIG look like a piker. One tenth of 1 percent is a rounding error, a small money transfer fee. That is all.

If it takes Obama and his gang this much time and effort to root out $165 million of wasteful spending how will they ever find time to wring real waste out of the system as they promised? When will we learn that government control of the economy is as far from Adam Smith's invisible hand as one could imagine. It is more like the heavy bludgeoning of the economy by a sledgehammer than the efficient allocation of resources that normal markets produce. Certainly there will be always be some level of excess and unfairness in a pure capitalistic system, but I never got a job from a poor guy! I'd rather take my chances of personal wealth creation in a free market than see guaranteed waste coming from the chunks of money being flushed down the drain by big government control. Fat cat capitalists might light their cigars with hundred dollar bills, but that is their choice of how to waste money. When government inflates its way out of its self induced mess, we all see our money's value go up in smoke with no say in the matter.

No, this is not about disgraceful waste of taxpayer dollars. This is President Elmer FUDD in action. It is all about Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt and Dumbing us down. The more Obama can FUDD us, the greater his chance to cram down his agenda.

Let's all be thankful that his hubris and inexperience lead him to show his full hand early in his presidency. For at least a moment he let the smoke dissipate long enough to see through the FUDD factor to realize what we all got in November.

Hopefully ego and legacy will be enough for him to recalibrate his philosophy before we are FUDDed for life:

- Fed up
- Unemployed
- Debt strapped
- Duped

He's making my head hurt!

2009-02-25T01:41:00.000-07:00

Obama how can you one day jack up the national debt by a $Trillion and then host a fiscal responsiblity summit the next day. Then tonight in his address to Congress he laid claim to inheriting a deficit of a $ Trillion (I don't even know how to write a Trillion) deficit from Bush. Come on. You can't have it both ways.

As US News points out, not everyone is buying this.

Why so urgent Mr. President? Why so urgent?

2009-02-13T01:29:00.000-07:00

For anyone who has seen the magnificent final role of Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight, those words have a similar haunting echo. As the Joker clutched frightened victims in his grasp – knife at their throat, a mocking smile painted on his face – he growled, “why so serious, why sooo serious.”

As the nation listened to its first telepromted press conference hosted by President Obama we all felt his menacing grip on our throats, or at least on our wallets. We need the Joker to grab hold of him and ask why so urgent, why soooo urgent?

Immediately after the press conference in the online edition of the Wall Street Journal we saw the President’s stern picture with a summary of his remarks: We are facing a catastrophe, we are on the brink of an irreversible and permanent recession, the lost decade will soon descend upon us, the worst economic crisis since the great depression.

Directly under the story of the President’s press conference were two other interesting articles. One underscored that without government intervention (how shocking) the credit markets for highly rated companies such as Cisco (raising $4 billion at attractive rates) had improved significantly. The other, noted value investors are seeing attractive opportunities in the junk bond market.

How could this be? Those sorts of things don’t happen in catastrophes. A catastrophe is not a $14 trillion GDP dropping to $13 trillion. A catastrophe is not having 92% of the workforce employed. Surely during a true catastrophe people the roads would be empty as would the local Starbucks. True catastrophes on a national level are rare and hard to fathom in our soft and indulgent society. What qualifies as a catastrophe? Civil war, nuclear bombs being dropped on your country, widespread famine and murder – think Rwanda or Darfur, not the United States in 2009.

If President Obama was a student of economics and understood what happened during Japan’s lost decade he would have to admit that while it was a tough economic time for Japan, much as it is for the U.S. now, neither of these scenarios qualify as catastrophes. The average Japanese during the “lost decade” still had income, widespread homelessness did not transpire, food was adequate. Even recreational activities still occurred. We can all conjure up true catastrophes and this does not qualify. Certainly there are individual catastrophes but as a collective nation life is still a lot better than the virtually anywhere else in the world.

So why the intense rhetoric? Why a few hours after the Senate passed the stimulus (aka government growth ) bill did the President tell ABC news in his mellifluous voice that “now, I think we've got to keep perspective. We're not going through the Great Depression…so some of what we need is just a restoration of confidence and people's belief that in fact, we can harness all these resources to continue to be the most dynamic economy on earth.”

Is it because, in the words of Rahm Emanuel, “you never want a serious crisis to go to waste”? Is it that he wanted to make sure Nancy Pelosi got her belated Christmas present - a bloated spending and government expansion package that could only be passed in a moment of immediate cataclysmic doom? Or is it just another politician taking advantage of an emergency to further their agenda?

Just this fall we heard Congress was telling us the same thing about the TARP bill. If it didn’t pass immediately the free market system as we know it would cease to exist. But what happened then. Several weeks passed and life continued. The world did not come to a screeching halt. Maybe for those whose lives center inside the beltway, or in Manhattan, the world would have stopped rotating. But for those who live in those spheres hear this little secret. The average American is clever, resourceful, adaptive and will rise to the challenge when pressed. We will figure out ways to re-align our lives to the new reality. We will form our own lending pools and fund viable businesses. We will barter, we will create new units of monetary value, we will move three families back into one house and pool our resources. And we will care for our own even if Uncle Sam doesn’t drop dollar bills from the sky.

Any time government moves with the speed of an anxious short seller racing to cover his bets, we all ought to shout – Stop, take a breath, why so urgent. Nothing the government does in haste turns out well. And very few things the government does with deliberation turns out well either.

Why are we willing then to accept politicians who claim that speed is of the essence and that “while this isn’t a perfect bill, we need to act.” Can’t we impose a political Hippocratic oath – first, do no harm? For an organization that can’t even manage its own cafeteria why do we trust them to spend a trillion dollars with little scrutiny? Why can’t they take another month, or two or twelve to get it perfect? Or at least to go slowly and see how the invisible hand is working to mend itself. This is just a political sleight of hand – telling us it is all about stimulus when in reality it is just a wasteful effort to throw more fuel into the belly of the beast.

The urgency is due to two simple reasons. Number one, something this ugly, wasteful and ineffective that dramatically increases the role of the government can’t stay in the limelight long before its rotting stench wakes us all up. Nope, this rancid sausage has to be pushed out the door before the consumer can glance down at the expiration date.

Number two, Obama and his team know that this economy is slowly righting itself. Partly because that is what free markets do – they use recessions to clear out excess to pave the way for renewed growth. Just like nature uses naturally induced burns to set the stage for a beautiful renewal of growth. Now that we are past the noise of the election, the media and Team Obama will start to point out small shafts of light shining down into the otherwise gloomy cave they carved out for us. They can’t do this too soon lest President Bush gets any credit. No, the previous administration has to be blamed for burning the country to the ground – Sherman style.

If the whiffs of recovery start leaking out too soon, the sense of doom and urgency slip from their fingers, and the public will rise up and say wait one second – not so fast. Furthermore, if Obama can get this “stimulus” plan passed he knows it will delay the recovery, but won’t stop it dead. When the recovery is delayed six, twelve, eighteen months by this “stimulus” no one will be the wiser. The President can still claim it was their bold and brave actions to waste our money that turned the corner - but it took longer than they thought because the terrible hole President Bush left us in was far deeper than anyone imagined. Besides, what is another year or two of economic agony for Joe the plumber if the democrats get what they want? Alas, another generation of voters will believe – much like so many during the 30’s – that only the government can truly solve our deepest challenges. Completely clueless to the damage it wrought.

At least FDR calmed nerves with his words – “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” Unfortunately our current President only stirs up panic and angst. One can imagine him saying - The only catastrophe we face is the catastrophe I foist upon you.

That is why so urgent!