We Need Solutions, not Scapegoats

For the past two days, America's radio talk show circuit has been abuzz about President Obama's remarks, made in this video clip:



The remarks demonstrate precisely the problem with the Administration's handling of the gulf oil spill (and most problems it's presented with): Instead of looking for solutions to the problem, they seek a scapegoat to blame for the whole problem. I, for one, feel very comforted when our nation's Commander-in-Chief walks around referring to whom he can beat up and how. (No wonder people have taken to referring to the Obama Administration as a "thugocracy".)

I would far prefer that the Administration seek real solutions, not scapegoats.

Insufferable Idiots

I heard the following comment the other day:

"America can tolerate a one-term Obama presidency,
it's the idiots who elected him who worry me,
for they may elect another Democrat who's just as bad"

This post is thus dedicated to (and an illustration of) the idiots who voted for Obama. (These segments are actually more than a year old, but I wanted to archive them in perpetuity in my little corner of cyberspace. I hope you enjoy them!)

Idiot #1: He probably had to change his pants after this. (the pertinent segment is from about 0:38 through 0:45.)


Idiot #2: "I won't have to worry about putting gas in my char. I won't have to worry about paying my mortgage." (The fun begins at 0:15.)

Destroying Our Future. One Dream at a Time.

I think it's quite possible that pigs may have learned to fly. (And, I'm not referring to aircraft-assisted flight, or to the soaring level of pork under the current Democrat Congress/Administration.) I am referring to the fact that I have finally found an area in which I do not want to see spending cuts: Our space program.

According to Fox News, Obama's spending plan for the coming year freezes NASA's budget at it's current level. While I applaud the new-found spending restraint, this essentially puts the brakes on NASA's Constellation program, which oversees the agency's manned space flight efforts. And while holding the budget at current levels isn't a cut, it amounts to a beheading, as

"The program needs about $3 billion in additional funding annually for the next five years to keep the International Space Station supplied and to create a new generation of spacecraft, according to a commission the president appointed last year."

By failing to give the agency what it needs to continue the program, he's basically cutting the program in its entirety. (Unless, of course, NASA is able to cut enough costs elsewhere to continue the program.)

But is this really the right program to cut? Obama just gave a lacklustre State of the Union address in which he hailed our need to create jobs. But, how many jobs does the program provide? Moreover, these are high-paying jobs that require a high degree of education and specialization. That seems a bit of a hypocrisy, given the daily deluge of Public Service Announcements featuring Obama yapping about how we should "stay in school" to help keep America competitive. Some competition: By cutting this program, NASA will be forced to "outsource space flight to other governments -- such as the Russians." That sounds more like surrender than competition to me.

One may think the decision to cut the program to be simply a practical one: we have to cut somewhere, right? Well, not so fast. In cutting the program,

"...the White House will direct NASA to concentrate on earth science projects -- principally, researching and monitoring climate change..." (emphasis mine)

So now we see the real reason for the decision: Manned space flight doesn't help him advance his political agenda, but climate change does. So, we're trading the hopes and dreams of a nation that was once inspired to put a men on the moon in exchange for the futility of chasing a scientific hoax.

Small Business: The Real Enemy of the State

This may come as a shock to some of you, but to Obama, America's real enemy isn't terrorism, Al Qaeda, or the Taliban: It's Small Business. Last weeks' dog and pony show known as the jobs summit is all the proof we need. Obama's own words prove my point:

Despite the progress we've made, many businesses are still skittish about hiring. Some are still digging themselves out of the losses they incurred over the past year. Many have figured out how to squeeze more productivity out of fewer workers. And that cost-cutting has become embedded in their operations and in their culture. That may result in good profits, but it's not translating into hiring and so that's the question that we have to ask ourselves today: How do we get businesses to start hiring again?

For those who do not yet know how to interpret this President, let me translate:

Many businesses have lost money over the last year. And now, they're so concerned with making a profit that they're taking advantage of their poor, oppressed employees by squeezing more productivity and/or hours out of them. They're mercilessly cutting costs and benefits to increase their profits. So, how can we get businesses to realize that they exist to hire and serve their employees? Without banning or capping their profits, how can we get small businesses to sacrifice their profits for the good of the oppressed (and the Country)?

Since the real enemy of the state is Small Business (and the profits held by the Private Sector in general), it's no wonder the Senate Health Care bill (in its current form) intentionally increases insurance premiums for the self-employed and the small business owner. Only by increasing the risk of taking an entrepreneurial venture can America truly eliminate the entrepreneurial spirit that has helped make this country great. And only by eliminating the evil profits from the private sector can we create the conditions for economic growth. And only by sacrificing the good of the one can we secure the good of the many.

This is the world, according to Obama. Personally, I subscribe to the view of Adam Smith: (my paraphrase): FWhen individuals were free to pursue their own self-interest, the good of the many is the natural result.

Obama Succeeds: Restores Respect for America

While on the campaign trail, Obama promised that he would "Restore [the world's] respect for America." So, how's he doing so far? Let's look at just a few things he's done in the foreign policy arena since taking office:

1. Snubs the United Kingdom. Not once or twice, but three times!
2. Bows to a foreign monarch (Saudi King Abdullah).
3. Flirts with Cuba, lifting travel restrictions, and limitations on monetary transfers to Cuba.
4. Allows North Korea to fire a test missile over one of our allies without anything more than a wimper that "they didn't play by the rules".
   

So, barring my personal commentary on the above items, let's look at the world's reaction to these items:

1. The British Media (which apparently has better memory than American Media) are outraged.
2. French President Sarkozy mocks Obama. (It should be noted that it's almost as rare for a head of state to publicly mock the head of another state as it is for one head of state to bow to another.)
3. Venezuela's "President" Hugo Chavez tells Obama "I want to be your friend".

This raises a few thoughts for me: I think he's certainly done a great job of restoring respect for America -- at least among Communist Thugs (like Chavez & Castro). And since C&C apparently "love" us now, I'm left wondering what Kim Jong Ill thinks of America now. The Administration took two weeks to garner sufficient support in the U.N. Security Council to pass a resolution condemning North Korea's missile launch. And while Obama claims that "there will be consequences", I would ask "consequences for whom?" Our lack of decisive action on that front may ensure that our children will have to deal with a nuclear North Korea.

But, I digress ever so slightly. Compre the list of nations (and heads of nations) who have responded favorably to Obama's performance thus far with the list of those who have criticized it. I think anyone who loves America should be really worried that we are garnering the praise and support of those who hate our country, while we snub those who have long been our allies in the defense of Democracy. Perhaps we should ask why C&C suddenly love us. Do they heartily approve of the new Socialist agenda? Or do they like the unsustainable spending that will one day bankrupt us? Or do they just want to gain our trust so they can stab us in the back? Maybe they just love the fact that he's giving them everything they've ever asked for (and then some). Or maybe they're hoping to learn from the man who has done more to advance Socialism in less than 100 days than they have in years? Any other ideas? I'd love to hear them.