Quickie: Another one!

Boy, I really thought the Obama Administration was out of the woods with this issue.

I guess not!

A Letter to President Obama

Dear President Obama,

As this is my first letter to you, I would like to congratulate you on your victory over Senator McCain in November’s election. You ran a very impressive campaign and inspired numerous disinterested citizens to become passionate advocates for you and your ideas.

While some of them believed in the direction you wanted to take our country, I think that even you would admit that the majority of them were more taken with your oratory skills and your dramatic performances in public events than with your policies. In fact, you not only inspired legions of Americans with your impressive speaking abilities, but the rest of the world as well, as shown in the enormous crowd that came to hear you speak in Germany and the jubilant celebrations following your victory that occurred all over the world.

With those events undoubtedly still fresh in your mind, it is quite understandable that you would believe that you are capable of convincing anyone to do anything by merely speaking to them in the eloquent manner that enraptured citizens the world over.

Mr. President, I’m sorry, but that couldn’t be further from the truth.

While I admire your self-confidence, your message to Iran's supreme clerical leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other Iranian officials was not only dangerous, but also embarrassing.

Dangerous in the sense that it portrayed us as weak and afraid of Iran…something that the Iranians obviously sensed and will seize upon. It also shifted the momentum in our relationship from us to them. By allowing them to reject your overtures to speak with them, you have not only given them credibility, but you have shifted the onus to us to come up with better terms for the Iranians in any future negotiations. I simply cannot understand this approach.

Embarrassing in the sense that the speech was filled with fluff, pathetic and overdone compliments and no clear purpose or theme besides a naively simplistic and idealistic idea of peace. The compliments were especially difficult to listen to as they were given in such an excessive manner that it reminded me of a teenage girl describing her latest crush. Endlessly praising the Persian culture without even mentioning the atrocities it has been responsible for over the past three decades is not only disgraceful, but also terribly disrespectful to the people that have suffered and died at the hands of this oppressive, tyrannical regime.

On top of all of that, you tried to make a rational appeal to a group of irrational people… an approach that is inherently doomed to fail.

You also made the false assumption that the Iranian government wants to be part of the worldwide community and work towards a peaceful coexistence with everyone else. There is absolutely no evidence of this as Iran has done nothing but act on behalf of its own self-interests by committing acts of terrorism, supporting terrorist organizations and destabilizing the region by attacking its neighbors in an attempt to enhance its own standing over the past three decades. Surely, Mr. President, you must recognize this fact.

It is my opinion, Mr. President, that you stop handling Iran with kid gloves and start addressing the problem with some solutions that actually have a chance to work.

Some examples would be:

· Working to block gasoline supplies to Iran. With their inability to refine the oil that they produce, this action would cripple their fledgling economy, add to the unrest that already exists among the Iranian citizens and shift the balance of power back to us in this relationship.

· Support an Israeli air strike that would take out the Iranian nuclear weapons program. While this may be too late, it would at worst set the program back by a significant amount of time and, at best, it could potentially eliminate the entire program altogether.

· Take out the Iranian nuclear program ourselves. We have plenty of military personal and equipment in the region as it is and it could be easily accomplished. Additionally, it would reiterate our insistence that no rogue regimes possess nuclear weapons…undoubtedly, North Korea would recognize the consequences of such actions.

I know that these actions are neither nice nor friendly, but we are far beyond the point of diplomacy as Iran may already have developed a nuclear weapon. Moreover, with their collaboration with the North Koreans and their missile program, the ramifications of an aggressive Iranian policy would have positive ripple effects to other aspects of our foreign policy.

I ask that you please act like the thoughtful and pragmatic person you purport to be and consider these actions.

Yours truly,

John

I just hope he gives this message more consideration than the Iranians gave his.

That’s all for now folks. Until next time, take care and be well.

-John

Conservatives: The untouchables of America.

I had a strange thing happen to me the other night and I thought some of you would find it fairly interesting…

Due to the relatively pleasant weather that we Milwaukeeans were enjoying this past Sunday afternoon/evening, my wonderful girlfriend and I were invited to a barbeque with some of our friends.

To be honest, they were her friends first, however, in the nearly two years I have been with my girlfriend; I have become friends with them as well.

We were at the incredibly posh condo of one of the couples that has done very, very well in real estate development. The condo is located on the fashionable, trendy and extremely liberal East Side of Milwaukee.

There were three couples all in their late 20’s or early 30’s, a woman (the neighbor of the host) who is probably around 50 or so and her small dog.

Very good group and atmosphere. Casual, lighthearted, fun.

The night was quite pleasant as the food was quickly eaten, beers and martinis drank and humorous stories ranging from pets, grandparents, professional mascots, chimpanzees and awkward encounters with neighbors were exchanged.

For once politics did not really come up…but I do stress the word “really”.

Knowing the political leanings of the other two couples and after hearing the neighbor woman go on and on about Jon Stewart’s “brilliant” performance while debating Jim Cramer, I knew that my girlfriend and I were outnumbered…badly.

And let me be honest about this…I’m perfectly fine with that. Many of my friends are liberals and I have no problem hanging out with them, confiding in them or even discussing politics with them. To me, they are not defined by their political views. Even if they were, I am not that close-minded to only surround myself with like-minded individuals.

Anyway, as I said, we were discussing chimpanzees and I brought up an old program that Fox ran a couple of years back called “Man vs. Beast”. “Man vs. Beast” was a ridiculous competition pitting humans and animals against each other in athletic events.

The strange thing that happened to me was when I brought up the show.

I said, “Have any of you heard of the show “Man vs. Beast?”.

No one did.

Somebody asked me what channel it was on and I responded, “Fox”. The neighbor woman heard the word “Fox” and replied, “Well, there’s your problem”…she was clearly referring to Fox News.

At that point, one of the girls mouths to the neighbor woman with her eyes open wide and a slow nodding of the head, “No, he’s a…”.

In response, the neighbor woman mouthed “oh…”, eyes equally big, nod equally slow.

She didn’t even have to say or mouth the word “conservative”…she knew what she meant.

Now, I know they did not intend me to see the exchange, so it’s not like they tried to make a big deal about it or anything, but it just kind of struck me as odd that the exchange even took place. It was as if to say, “Well, this barbaric and simplistic interest is only explained by his conservative viewpoint”.

And the look on the neighbor’s face was priceless, as it seemed to convey the thought, “My God, one of them slipped in!”.

The rest of the night concluded without incident and nothing more was made of the issue.

Maybe I’m being sensitive here, but the more I think about it, the more it stays with me. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that I was offended or hurt, but after it happened, I felt different, apart from the rest of the group. It was a feeling I certainly didn’t have before this brief, seven-second exchange took place, that’s for sure.

So, is that what we conservatives have been reduced to, a group of untouchables? A boorish and uncouth group of people that must be identified before speaking as to alert the other, more civilized members of society of our existence? A collection of people whose thoughts and ideals are backwards when compared to those of the enlightened Left?

Hopefully, that’s just the case on the East Side of Milwaukee.

That’s all for now folks. Until next time, take care and be well.

-John

The Biden File: No concept of history.

I guess I still don’t understand why I’m surprised by what this guy says.

I know we have had some politicians that misspoke from time to time, but I cannot remember a politician that gets more things wrong and has such a lack of understanding of history as Vice President Biden.

Quickie: Unreal…nothing else to say.

I certainly hope that President Obama has a change of heart of this slap in the face to our veterans.

Quickie: They are going to be right in our back yard again.

I think this would be a great opportunity for President Obama to show strong support for the missile shield over Europe.

What ever happened to that “line by line” elimination of earmarks?

If you haven’t been paying attention to the news lately, you may have missed the fact that President Obama just signed a Congressional spending bill that had some earmarks in it and they will cost us taxpayers a little bit of money.

Oh yeah, by “some”, I mean 8,816 of them and by “little bit of money”, I mean $7.6 billion.

But Mr. President, I thought we you getting rid of all of those earmarks! After all, didn’t you say the following:

"We can no longer accept a process that doles out earmarks based on a member of Congress' seniority, rather than the merit of the project."

“Our earmark system, some call it pork-barrel spending, in Washington, is fraught with abuse. It badly needs reform.”

Oh yes, that’s right, that was candidate Obama speaking, not President Obama. There seems to be a growing gap between those two, doesn’t there?

Now I could sit here and list out the top offenders and the most absurd projects, but that’s already been done to death. I would rather explore the reasons behind the signing of this bill as I find that to be far more interesting... and troubling.

First, I have a question…why is he signing this bill in the first place?

Here’s a quote from President Obama about the bill just after he signed it:

"Let there be no doubt, this piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business, and the beginning of a new era of responsibility and accountability.”

Have you ever heard a president sign a bill and within minutes start criticizing it? I mean if the bill is such a bad thing, why is did he sign it?

Well in my estimation, the answer to those questions can be one three choices.

Reason #1. He’s a liar.

I know that’s a rather plain way of putting it, but I think it’s appropriate in this case. He signed the bill because he lied to us. He lied throughout the campaign, he lied after he was elected and he’s lying to us now.

Reason #2. He’s lazy.

Here’s another quote from President Obama regarding this bill:

"I am signing an imperfect... bill."

Wait a minute, if it’s imperfect, why don’t you fix it?

It’s because he’s lazy.

We all know how much he loves his weekend getaways with Michelle and with his kids having Spring Break, Lord knows the business of our country has to take a back seat.

By the way, didn’t a large number of Governor Palin’s detractors say that a mother of five couldn’t be Vice President because her family would take away from the business of the country?

Reason #3. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are running the show.

While I think I was getting warm with the first three, I have a feeling I’m getting red-hot now.

Obama’s inexperience has been well documented and this is just the latest example of it, as he clearly could not control the party he supposedly leads.

If he could control them, I really think he would not be forced to sign this embarrassing bill filled with the very earmarks that he’s been heavily criticizing for the past nine months.

Truth be told, I really think this latest capitulation is due in part to a combination of all three options.

But who knows, maybe this is just a temporary course of action during “unprecedented times”.

Hopefully he’s telling the truth and this will be the end of business as usual as we all know it in Washington.

Hopefully, he will find some semblance of financial responsibility.

Hopefully, he will usher in the change that he promised, but so far, has failed to produce.

I can remain hopeful…just not optimistic.

That’s all for now folks. Until next time, take care and be well.

-John

Quickie: We’ve just been taken for a ride folks…

So…things aren’t so bad after all, huh Mr. President?

Well then, that’s great, I’m sure you’ll have no problem canceling all of your spending plans that were franticly passed due to the assumption that the economy was in such bad shape and we needed this “historic” government intervention or else...

Yeah…that wasn’t included in the story.

I guess they were right…never let a serious crisis go to waste.

Do a president’s oratory skills really matter?

I bring this question up because we have just left the administration of a president that was always (and at times, unfairly so) criticized for his ham-fisted performances in formal speeches and every day speaking opportunities and have just entered the administration of a president that is often (too much, at times) lauded for his performance in those very same endeavors.

I guess the answer to the title question seems to depend on who is leading each party, now doesn’t it?

If you ask this question to supporters of each president, I will guarantee you that more supporters of President Obama will say that good oratory skills are important than President Bush supporters would.

So back to the question at hand, do they actually matter?

Obviously, there has to be some intelligence, knowledge and savviness behind the words, but I do believe that the oratory skills of a president are incredibly important and matter a great deal.

I know some may argue that the ability to give a good speech does not qualify someone to be president and that the inability to do so should not disqualify someone as well.

I would wholeheartedly agree with the first statement and agree with the second one...but only to a certain point.

A president could have incredibly brilliant and well thought out policies, but if they cannot articulate them to the public or to other members of the government what good would they be?

For an example of this, take President Bush’s plan to restructure Social Security.

To me, this was a brilliant plan. The plan would divert some of your Social Security withholdings to a personal account that would be invested in Wall Street. This would have done wonders for the market and created substantial wealth for every person that contributed to the fund. Moreover, it would have solved the budgetary shortfalls the system faces in the not too distant future.

We all know what happened to that plan; it failed because the American people didn’t buy into it.

Why was that?

Well, it was because President Bush simply could not properly communicate it to the average citizen. He tried using graphs and charts, speaking to the public through the press; even campaigning around the country trying to gain support for this plan. In the end, it just didn’t work…he couldn’t close the deal. The message was solid, the messenger…not so much.

The importance of oratory skills is not a new phenomenon that is a byproduct of the 24-hour news cycle.

Think about the basic foundation of our country. What is it?

It is not a crop or a good that can be bought, traded or sold.

It is not a political system or a ruling dynasty.

It is an idea and that idea is freedom.

How did this idea of freedom take root? It was founded in the streets of Boston and governmental chambers of Virginia and born in the fiery speeches of John Adams, Samuel Adams and Patrick Henry. It spread through the word of mouth of colonial citizens and took hold from Maine to Georgia.

So you see that strong political oratory predates the founding of our country and played an incredibly vital role in its founding.

Plus, can anyone really remember what a president wrote in any of their official documents?

Of course not, but can anyone remember any speeches given by our presidents?

Of course you can!

“Four score and seven years ago…”

“Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country…”

“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall…”

“The only thing we have to fear is fear itself…”

“I am not a crook…”

“It depends on what the meaning of “is” is…”

Sorry about those last two, but I couldn’t help myself.

Having sound oratory skills is an invaluable weapon in a president’s arsenal. They help a president look more focused, sure of himself, prepared…in short, presidential.

So when someone says, “All Obama can do is give a good speech”, don’t shrug that off as some inconsequential skill…even if it is aided by a teleprompter.

That’s all for now folks. Until next time, take care and be well.

-John

Quickie: Anyone surprised by this?

I didn’t think so.

Yeah, let’s close this place and let all of these guys free.