Democratic strategist and Clintonista, James Carville, spoke to Politico about Obama's economic plan: "They believe that they have to say what they are doing is working, but let me tell you, that's annoying the hell out of people. No one thinks it's true. It irritates people who are out there struggling and just feeds this perception that they are out of touch."
You heard it here, Obama will face a Democratic primary. Who will be the one taking the plunge? Hillary? Out-going Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana? Will Obama even make it to the primary if a challenger shows impressive polling numbers?
Saturday, September 18, 2010
The U.S. in revolutionary mode
This past week's republican primaries across the nation dealt a very serious blow to the Republican party as the rank-and-file voted for tea party candidates in New York's gubernatorial race and Delaware's US senate seat once held by vice president Joseph Biden.
Clearly, Americans see the need for political change as they've grown tired of the same aged politicians who've been in Washington for decades providing the same old gibberish. Americans are yearning for freshness. For something bold and out of the ordinary (which they thought, mistakenly, they'd get from President Obama). And, they are out for blood, too.
In several letters to friends, Thomas Jefferson wrote, "God forbid we should ever be twenty years without a such a rebellion." Well, Jefferson would be proud to see Americans standing up in defense of their nation and their liberty from corrupt politicians who think their cherished seats in the House and in the Senate belongs to them and not the people.
The 1994 Contract with America brought about changes in Congress under former Speaker Newt Gingrinch such as welfare reform and a balanced budget. But, that revolution was short-lived after Gingrinch resigned in 1999.
Fed up with the increasing cycle of spending, the republicans were booted in the 2006 mid-term election, and replaced by Nancy Pelosi as House speaker and Harry Reid as the senate majority leader. Nothing changed, really, as spending still increased under Bush's last two years in office. However, those increases paled in comparison to the $2T increased federal expenditure under Obama's 20-month presidency thanks to the Stimulus and the healthcare reform. Two programs Americans totally opposed.
"The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occassions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will always be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then. It is like a storm in the atmosphere," wrote Jefferson to his wife Abigail in 1787.
The GOP status quo in New York, which, if you haven't noticed, has been on life support for the past decade, sought to crown Rick Lazio as its gubernatorial candidate. Far from it, thought the rank-and-file, who then went on to support the winner, Carl Paladino of Buffalo.
Now, the state party is looking at quietly supporting the Democrat Andrew Cuomo, as has former NY senator Alphonse D'Amato done. What gives? The bottom line is power and money. The state GOP does not truly like or appreciate its rank-and-file. It thinks it owns them and their vote just because these registered voters don't like the Democrat party. After all, where else will such voters go to on primary day or in the general election? Staying home is an option, but then that will leave the party stalwarts to be the decider.
Money is the other part of this equation, and D'Amato, for example, has a lucrative lobbying business that survives on tax dollars being doled out to him by state and city agencies who routinely call Big Al to place a five-figure call to so-and-so for this-and-that. Don't believe me, google it and you'll find plenty of NY Post articles about it.
In Delaware, the same GOP establishment sought to snooker the voters by tarring the eventual winner and tea party favored candidate, Christine O'Donnell, as a candidate who was destined to lose in the general election. Sorry, but the folks aren't buying it anymore.
What the tea party has done to the Republican party is that it has shaken the GOP's foundation to the core. But, it's not finished yet. This is but the beginning of a long political revolution to take back this nation and its government from the ruling cabal who have woefully led us into near bankruptcy and financial ruin in their quest to expand both the government and their corrupt pockets at the expense of the American people and their liberty.
The tea party has done what neither party has been able to do for a long time. It has listened and united a large cross-section of the American people who feel they've been abandoned by both parties to network for a common goal. To cleanse Washington and the state legislatures.
Some are saying the tea party will fizzle out after November. Love to say it but 2010 is but a quiz for the real change will come in 2012.
Governor Sarah Palin is taking her sweet time assessing the maelstrom, organizing, strategizing, listening and talking the talk voters want to hear.
"I hold it that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms are in the physical," wrote Jefferson to James Madison in 1787.
Truer words said over 200 years ago are still having an impact in American politics today. If only Jefferson could be alive to witness it all over again and to provide counsel.
Clearly, Americans see the need for political change as they've grown tired of the same aged politicians who've been in Washington for decades providing the same old gibberish. Americans are yearning for freshness. For something bold and out of the ordinary (which they thought, mistakenly, they'd get from President Obama). And, they are out for blood, too.
In several letters to friends, Thomas Jefferson wrote, "God forbid we should ever be twenty years without a such a rebellion." Well, Jefferson would be proud to see Americans standing up in defense of their nation and their liberty from corrupt politicians who think their cherished seats in the House and in the Senate belongs to them and not the people.
The 1994 Contract with America brought about changes in Congress under former Speaker Newt Gingrinch such as welfare reform and a balanced budget. But, that revolution was short-lived after Gingrinch resigned in 1999.
Fed up with the increasing cycle of spending, the republicans were booted in the 2006 mid-term election, and replaced by Nancy Pelosi as House speaker and Harry Reid as the senate majority leader. Nothing changed, really, as spending still increased under Bush's last two years in office. However, those increases paled in comparison to the $2T increased federal expenditure under Obama's 20-month presidency thanks to the Stimulus and the healthcare reform. Two programs Americans totally opposed.
"The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occassions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will always be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then. It is like a storm in the atmosphere," wrote Jefferson to his wife Abigail in 1787.
The GOP status quo in New York, which, if you haven't noticed, has been on life support for the past decade, sought to crown Rick Lazio as its gubernatorial candidate. Far from it, thought the rank-and-file, who then went on to support the winner, Carl Paladino of Buffalo.
Now, the state party is looking at quietly supporting the Democrat Andrew Cuomo, as has former NY senator Alphonse D'Amato done. What gives? The bottom line is power and money. The state GOP does not truly like or appreciate its rank-and-file. It thinks it owns them and their vote just because these registered voters don't like the Democrat party. After all, where else will such voters go to on primary day or in the general election? Staying home is an option, but then that will leave the party stalwarts to be the decider.
Money is the other part of this equation, and D'Amato, for example, has a lucrative lobbying business that survives on tax dollars being doled out to him by state and city agencies who routinely call Big Al to place a five-figure call to so-and-so for this-and-that. Don't believe me, google it and you'll find plenty of NY Post articles about it.
In Delaware, the same GOP establishment sought to snooker the voters by tarring the eventual winner and tea party favored candidate, Christine O'Donnell, as a candidate who was destined to lose in the general election. Sorry, but the folks aren't buying it anymore.
What the tea party has done to the Republican party is that it has shaken the GOP's foundation to the core. But, it's not finished yet. This is but the beginning of a long political revolution to take back this nation and its government from the ruling cabal who have woefully led us into near bankruptcy and financial ruin in their quest to expand both the government and their corrupt pockets at the expense of the American people and their liberty.
The tea party has done what neither party has been able to do for a long time. It has listened and united a large cross-section of the American people who feel they've been abandoned by both parties to network for a common goal. To cleanse Washington and the state legislatures.
Some are saying the tea party will fizzle out after November. Love to say it but 2010 is but a quiz for the real change will come in 2012.
Governor Sarah Palin is taking her sweet time assessing the maelstrom, organizing, strategizing, listening and talking the talk voters want to hear.
"I hold it that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms are in the physical," wrote Jefferson to James Madison in 1787.
Truer words said over 200 years ago are still having an impact in American politics today. If only Jefferson could be alive to witness it all over again and to provide counsel.
Friday, September 10, 2010
Obama takes on the GOP while Democrats run towards Bush
I find is amusing, all this political stuff happening across the nation. Nothing soothes the American palate most watching career politicians scurrying throughout their districts in need of support, and being told that it's time to give up the seat.
Millions of Americans, 17M estimated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, are unemployed, and because Congress has yet to energize the economy with a cogent plan that does not stifle economic prosperity, millions of voters are finally having a say in the coming election. They are planning a massive routing of Congress, and for the second time in five years, both Houses stand a chance of switching party control.
Americans are visibly angry and rightly so. We are going on three years with stagnant economic growth, businesses afraid to lend or invest and hire, and an end to the Bush tax cuts at the end of the year.
Meanwhile, President Obama flirted with the idea of a $50B stimulus to help build up infrastructure and green technology. That plan was sunk by Congress days later, because Americans do not want more government spending which will saddle future generations with a higher debt for the failure of today's leaders not being able to control spending and debt.
Today, as he has done in the past, President Obama has taken the GOP to task. It is an effort that is rather too little, too late given the president and his party's ignoring calls from the GOP to early last year to come to the table to craft pertinent legislation.
Fact is, Obama can call out the GOP all he wants, but voters have grown weary of such attacks. It will not work. It is too late for Obama and the congressional Democrats to stem the tide against them.
When Obama decries Bush's tax cuts and refuses to support extending it unless the cuts to the rich are taken out, and then you read about a number of Democrats supporting full extension of Bush's tax cuts, what does both messages say to the American people?
How can a president blame the economic mess on Bush's tax policies, and then you see Democrats running in support of that very same Bush policy?
Look, neither President Obama nor the congressional Democrats know or have a cogent plan to help the economy. The president's economic advisors are not men and women who come from the business sector. They are professors who understand economic theory ensconced in their academic bubble, but know absolutely nothing about actual business practices.
The United States is on the verge of a political revolution like that which hasn't been seen since 2006 and 1994. Americans want real, positive political and economic changes that betters the standard of life for all. Americans are sick and tired of class warfare, high taxation, federal mandates, government spending and meddling, and an end to immigration abuses. Americans want a return to Constitutional government, and if it takes political turmoil at every election, then by far they are going to wreak havoc until the right leaders are elected to implement the necessary changes that's called for.
Millions of Americans, 17M estimated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, are unemployed, and because Congress has yet to energize the economy with a cogent plan that does not stifle economic prosperity, millions of voters are finally having a say in the coming election. They are planning a massive routing of Congress, and for the second time in five years, both Houses stand a chance of switching party control.
Americans are visibly angry and rightly so. We are going on three years with stagnant economic growth, businesses afraid to lend or invest and hire, and an end to the Bush tax cuts at the end of the year.
Meanwhile, President Obama flirted with the idea of a $50B stimulus to help build up infrastructure and green technology. That plan was sunk by Congress days later, because Americans do not want more government spending which will saddle future generations with a higher debt for the failure of today's leaders not being able to control spending and debt.
Today, as he has done in the past, President Obama has taken the GOP to task. It is an effort that is rather too little, too late given the president and his party's ignoring calls from the GOP to early last year to come to the table to craft pertinent legislation.
Fact is, Obama can call out the GOP all he wants, but voters have grown weary of such attacks. It will not work. It is too late for Obama and the congressional Democrats to stem the tide against them.
When Obama decries Bush's tax cuts and refuses to support extending it unless the cuts to the rich are taken out, and then you read about a number of Democrats supporting full extension of Bush's tax cuts, what does both messages say to the American people?
How can a president blame the economic mess on Bush's tax policies, and then you see Democrats running in support of that very same Bush policy?
Look, neither President Obama nor the congressional Democrats know or have a cogent plan to help the economy. The president's economic advisors are not men and women who come from the business sector. They are professors who understand economic theory ensconced in their academic bubble, but know absolutely nothing about actual business practices.
The United States is on the verge of a political revolution like that which hasn't been seen since 2006 and 1994. Americans want real, positive political and economic changes that betters the standard of life for all. Americans are sick and tired of class warfare, high taxation, federal mandates, government spending and meddling, and an end to immigration abuses. Americans want a return to Constitutional government, and if it takes political turmoil at every election, then by far they are going to wreak havoc until the right leaders are elected to implement the necessary changes that's called for.
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Passing the buck, Obama-style
So the US economy remains shaky even after the nearly $1T Stimulus Democrat package of 2009. The unemployment rate is at close to 10% or about 18M Americans. The DOW is riding waves surfboard riders wish they could see on either the Atlantic or Pacific. The national debt is at an astronomical $13T and mounting. And, tax increases looms beginning next year when former President Bush's tax cuts expire.
What does President Obama say about all of this data? Pretty much blames it all on congressional inaction.
How many more so-called Jobs and Stimulus bills will it take for the federal government to notice that such actions will not produce one iota of real jobs or stabilize the economy? The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
Unfortunately, Democrats don't pay mind to such reasoning. They control the purse-strings, and the entire government now. Can't blame the GOP for these bad numbers. The Democrats and Obama own these figures.
What does President Obama say about all of this data? Pretty much blames it all on congressional inaction.
How many more so-called Jobs and Stimulus bills will it take for the federal government to notice that such actions will not produce one iota of real jobs or stabilize the economy? The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
Unfortunately, Democrats don't pay mind to such reasoning. They control the purse-strings, and the entire government now. Can't blame the GOP for these bad numbers. The Democrats and Obama own these figures.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Obama still does not get it
American politics is an amusing blood sport to watch. Like President Bush before him, Obama is now the one Democrats don't want to be seen with in an election year. Not even a mere photo-op ala Charlie Crist.
It is becoming increasingly clear that Obama does not have the pulse of the nation. He clearly avoids siding with the American people in his belief that he has the greater wisdom. Such is the way of the fools' errand.
President Obama waded into the NYC mosque controversy, and it was not good.
Millions of Americans are upset that a mosque is being built so close to Ground Zero. Mr. President, there is no changing the majority's view of Islam as being diabolically responsible for the attacks on September 11, 2001. No mosque should be built there, period.
Perhaps New York City's labor unions can have a say here, and not work on such a project no matter how much their union members stand to gain.
Here's where NYC's labor can do for America what Obama, Mayor Bloomberg, Governor Patterson, and the state legislature, city council, the community board and the Landmarks Preservation Commission refused to do for all of us Americans. And, that is to take a strong stand against the Islamization of Ground Zero.
It is becoming increasingly clear that Obama does not have the pulse of the nation. He clearly avoids siding with the American people in his belief that he has the greater wisdom. Such is the way of the fools' errand.
President Obama waded into the NYC mosque controversy, and it was not good.
Millions of Americans are upset that a mosque is being built so close to Ground Zero. Mr. President, there is no changing the majority's view of Islam as being diabolically responsible for the attacks on September 11, 2001. No mosque should be built there, period.
Perhaps New York City's labor unions can have a say here, and not work on such a project no matter how much their union members stand to gain.
Here's where NYC's labor can do for America what Obama, Mayor Bloomberg, Governor Patterson, and the state legislature, city council, the community board and the Landmarks Preservation Commission refused to do for all of us Americans. And, that is to take a strong stand against the Islamization of Ground Zero.
Friday, April 30, 2010
Latinos hyperventilating over Arizona law
The national firestorm over the new state law passed by the Arizona state legislature and signed by the republican governor, Jan Brewer, last week has reignited the heated debate on both sides of the political aisle that has laid dormant for the past two years, as to what to do with illegal immigrants in the United States.
Arizona is a southern border state. It is estimated that 450,000 illegal aliens reside in the state out of a population of 6.8 million. It is also the state illegal aliens, and human and drug traffickers prefer to cross over because of the vast open desert space despite the dangers the desert poses.
American ranchers in the state have fought a never-ending battle to protect their property and livestock from these trespassers, and have urged and implored their elected officials to do something about this growing problem.
Just ask Robert Krentz, a rancher who not only complained about the problem, but also did whatever humanely possible to help those illegal aliens trespassing on his property by providing food and water. I say "did" because it's too late to ask him anything. Mr. Krentz, and his pet dog, was murdered on March 27th by an illegal alien who fled back to Mexico. His murder set in motion the state's response over the lack of a secured border and federal enforcement inaction.
So, what is the real reason why there is so much hostility towards SB 1070 by the supporters of illegal immigration like the ACLU, the National Council of La Raza and LULAC?
The carefully-crafted law, which, by the way, mirrors federal statutes, authorizes police officers to make a reasonable attempt to verify the immigration status of persons they come into lawful contact, and not to harass people based on the color of their skin.
Article 8, Section B states: "For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or agency of this state, or a county, city, town or political subdivision of this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person. The person's immigration status shall be verified with the federal government pursuant to 8 United States Code Section 1373 (c)."
Meaning, the law is very explicit. Law enforcement officers cannot stop anyone on the street or enter their homes to ask what their immigration status is without a lawful purpose to engage the individual. Such lawful purposes are anything like running a red light, speeding, a bar fight, smoking weed in public, a car accident, a broken turn signal light, intoxication, shoplifting, robbery, murder. Get the picture?
If you are an American citizen or a legal resident alien, you have nothing to fear.
So stop hyperventilating about being picked on for being latino. We are a nation of laws and order, and there is a serious illegal immigration problem in the nation, and Americans have a right to feel protected in their own homeland.
A special note of remembrance to Border Patrol Agent Robert W. Rosas, killed in the line of duty on July 23, 2009, in San Diego by an illegal alien who was recently sentenced to 40 years in a federal lock-up. May you rest in peace.
Arizona is a southern border state. It is estimated that 450,000 illegal aliens reside in the state out of a population of 6.8 million. It is also the state illegal aliens, and human and drug traffickers prefer to cross over because of the vast open desert space despite the dangers the desert poses.
American ranchers in the state have fought a never-ending battle to protect their property and livestock from these trespassers, and have urged and implored their elected officials to do something about this growing problem.
Just ask Robert Krentz, a rancher who not only complained about the problem, but also did whatever humanely possible to help those illegal aliens trespassing on his property by providing food and water. I say "did" because it's too late to ask him anything. Mr. Krentz, and his pet dog, was murdered on March 27th by an illegal alien who fled back to Mexico. His murder set in motion the state's response over the lack of a secured border and federal enforcement inaction.
So, what is the real reason why there is so much hostility towards SB 1070 by the supporters of illegal immigration like the ACLU, the National Council of La Raza and LULAC?
The carefully-crafted law, which, by the way, mirrors federal statutes, authorizes police officers to make a reasonable attempt to verify the immigration status of persons they come into lawful contact, and not to harass people based on the color of their skin.
Article 8, Section B states: "For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or agency of this state, or a county, city, town or political subdivision of this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person. The person's immigration status shall be verified with the federal government pursuant to 8 United States Code Section 1373 (c)."
Meaning, the law is very explicit. Law enforcement officers cannot stop anyone on the street or enter their homes to ask what their immigration status is without a lawful purpose to engage the individual. Such lawful purposes are anything like running a red light, speeding, a bar fight, smoking weed in public, a car accident, a broken turn signal light, intoxication, shoplifting, robbery, murder. Get the picture?
If you are an American citizen or a legal resident alien, you have nothing to fear.
So stop hyperventilating about being picked on for being latino. We are a nation of laws and order, and there is a serious illegal immigration problem in the nation, and Americans have a right to feel protected in their own homeland.
A special note of remembrance to Border Patrol Agent Robert W. Rosas, killed in the line of duty on July 23, 2009, in San Diego by an illegal alien who was recently sentenced to 40 years in a federal lock-up. May you rest in peace.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Castro Approves
Well, at least Cuban dictator Fidel Castro has lived long enough to witness the Democrat party take the path toward socialism in an In-Your-Face approach against the majority of the American people.
Hailing it "a miracle", Castro, who has watched ten U.S. presidents come and go since 1959, wrote in a Cuban daily, "We consider health reform to have been an important battle and a success of his (Obama's) government."
The Cuban premier continued, "It is really incredible that 234 years after the Declaration of Independence...the government of that country has approved medical attention for the majority of its citizens, something that Cuba was able to do half a century ago."
Well, here are a few photos of Cuba's system of universal healthcare. Enjoy, and then praise God for U.S. medical care.
Picture 1, Picture 2, Picture 3, Picture 4.
Hailing it "a miracle", Castro, who has watched ten U.S. presidents come and go since 1959, wrote in a Cuban daily, "We consider health reform to have been an important battle and a success of his (Obama's) government."
The Cuban premier continued, "It is really incredible that 234 years after the Declaration of Independence...the government of that country has approved medical attention for the majority of its citizens, something that Cuba was able to do half a century ago."
Well, here are a few photos of Cuba's system of universal healthcare. Enjoy, and then praise God for U.S. medical care.
Picture 1, Picture 2, Picture 3, Picture 4.
Monday, March 22, 2010
A Pyrrhic Victory On Healthcare
President Obama and congressional Democrats won a political victory Sunday evening by passing healthcare reform legislation by a vote of 219 - 212. As they say in politics, it's all about winning, whether the win is done via a bipartisan manner or not, as long as legislation is passed on a majority vote, then it's a win.
Congratulations to the Democrats! They won without a single republican vote and 34 Democrats voting against their own party's measure.
That said, this win is, in reality, a Pyrrhic victory for the Democrats for several reasons.
One, the simple House majority vote was not that large. They won by four votes, or a bare minimum. Four votes! What does that say about this legislation? That it's pretty much a bad bill that an entire opposition party could not support, unlike, say, the Civil Rights legislation of the 1960s where republicans joined non-Southern Democrats to say, hey, enough!
Two, the federal taxation that is going to have to be collected from all those who work will increase. There is no free lunch folks. Somebody has to pay for Congress's mess!
Three, the Democrats say this reform will pay for itself, but let's be real. When President Bush lobbied the congress in 2003 to pass the Prescription Drug bill, he told us the bill would cost over $400B over ten years. The figure more than doubled three years after passage, and will continue to increase.
Think the real cost Speaker Pelosi mentioned, of $940B, is the actual cost to insure the 30 million uninsured beginning in 2014? This is not taking into account the "Cornhusker" deals offered to members for their votes. It also does not take into account future amendments to put back the cuts into Medicare/Medicaid that Pelosi put in, in order to get the Congressional Budget Office's thumbs up as a deficit reducer.
Four, if anyone thinks this is the end of the healthcare reform debate, guess again. What the Democrats did Sunday evening was merely the beginning of the end of private healthcare insurance as we know it.
For liberal Democrats, a true healthcare victory is one in which the federal government provides universal healthcare coverage for all Americans modelled after the European nationalized healthcare system.
As Cong. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) explained on National Public Radio shortly after his "yes" vote, the passage opens the door for further government expansion into healthcare, and ultimately, universal healthcare.
This legislation, it is said, will cover 30 million uninsured Americans. However, as I recall during the Bush years, Democrats were lamenting the 47 million uninsured. What's happened to the 17 million uninsured? Who are they, and why weren't they covered by this Democrat-led bill?
The answer is simple.
Thinking well into the future, the Democrats' game plan is to launch another endeavor to Insure Those Left Behind. This new political effort will allow the Democrats to use this new uninsured group (perhaps a collection of illegal aliens) as a battle-cry against, to use Pelosi's language, the mean-spirited and evil GOP in 2012.
For millions of Americans who were let down the night of March 21, 2010, November cannot come any sooner.
Congratulations to the Democrats! They won without a single republican vote and 34 Democrats voting against their own party's measure.
That said, this win is, in reality, a Pyrrhic victory for the Democrats for several reasons.
One, the simple House majority vote was not that large. They won by four votes, or a bare minimum. Four votes! What does that say about this legislation? That it's pretty much a bad bill that an entire opposition party could not support, unlike, say, the Civil Rights legislation of the 1960s where republicans joined non-Southern Democrats to say, hey, enough!
Two, the federal taxation that is going to have to be collected from all those who work will increase. There is no free lunch folks. Somebody has to pay for Congress's mess!
Three, the Democrats say this reform will pay for itself, but let's be real. When President Bush lobbied the congress in 2003 to pass the Prescription Drug bill, he told us the bill would cost over $400B over ten years. The figure more than doubled three years after passage, and will continue to increase.
Think the real cost Speaker Pelosi mentioned, of $940B, is the actual cost to insure the 30 million uninsured beginning in 2014? This is not taking into account the "Cornhusker" deals offered to members for their votes. It also does not take into account future amendments to put back the cuts into Medicare/Medicaid that Pelosi put in, in order to get the Congressional Budget Office's thumbs up as a deficit reducer.
Four, if anyone thinks this is the end of the healthcare reform debate, guess again. What the Democrats did Sunday evening was merely the beginning of the end of private healthcare insurance as we know it.
For liberal Democrats, a true healthcare victory is one in which the federal government provides universal healthcare coverage for all Americans modelled after the European nationalized healthcare system.
As Cong. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) explained on National Public Radio shortly after his "yes" vote, the passage opens the door for further government expansion into healthcare, and ultimately, universal healthcare.
This legislation, it is said, will cover 30 million uninsured Americans. However, as I recall during the Bush years, Democrats were lamenting the 47 million uninsured. What's happened to the 17 million uninsured? Who are they, and why weren't they covered by this Democrat-led bill?
The answer is simple.
Thinking well into the future, the Democrats' game plan is to launch another endeavor to Insure Those Left Behind. This new political effort will allow the Democrats to use this new uninsured group (perhaps a collection of illegal aliens) as a battle-cry against, to use Pelosi's language, the mean-spirited and evil GOP in 2012.
For millions of Americans who were let down the night of March 21, 2010, November cannot come any sooner.
Monday, February 15, 2010
A political threat on the horizon for Obama
Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) decided today that he will not seek reelection this year, paving the way for a republican takeover of this seat the Democrats thought they would still retain.
Clearly, this is a huge deal as the Democrat Congress struggles to keep their control of both houses in a year when the voters are showing their total disgust for the body.
Bayh's departure sends another signal to the political orbit, one that should worry President Barack Hussein Obama.
Will the moderate Bayh, with his $13M campaign treasure and history, challenge the incumbent president in 2012 who is increasingly seen as a weak leader?
The Indiana senator was on Obama's list for vice president despite having endorsed Hillary Clinton's presidential candidacy, was the youngest governor elected to his state in 1989 at the age of 33, and has never lost an election.
Clearly, this is a huge deal as the Democrat Congress struggles to keep their control of both houses in a year when the voters are showing their total disgust for the body.
Bayh's departure sends another signal to the political orbit, one that should worry President Barack Hussein Obama.
Will the moderate Bayh, with his $13M campaign treasure and history, challenge the incumbent president in 2012 who is increasingly seen as a weak leader?
The Indiana senator was on Obama's list for vice president despite having endorsed Hillary Clinton's presidential candidacy, was the youngest governor elected to his state in 1989 at the age of 33, and has never lost an election.
Friday, February 5, 2010
Thoughts for the day
So, the only Kennedy serving in Washington, Congressman Patrick Kennedy (D-RI), the son of the late senator Ted Kennedy, has some mincy words for Massachusetts junior senator Scott Brown.
As reported in The Hill newspaper, Kennedy calls Brown's election as "a joke", and derides Brown's decision to move up his swearing in by a week.
Well, the people of Massachusetts voted in an election, and the winner was Brown. Does Kennedy think the voters in his father's state are a bunch of nitwits? What does he think of Senator Al Franken (D-MN)?
Sure, Kennedy is upset that Brown cast a vote last night against President Obama appointee to the National Labor Relations Board, but that is his right now.
Congressman Anthony Weiner (D-NY) appeared on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart last night, and was asked, "Is [Senator Joe Lieberman] a dick?"
Jokingly, Weiner responded, "Yes, Jon."
In a week where we have also learned that White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel referred to wayward Democrat activitsts at "retards" last August in a private meeting with Democrats, what's happened to the Democrats' call for civility?
Speaking of Senator Al Franken, it's getting interesting watching this attack dog going after Obama for not laying the groundwork for easy passage of health care legislation.
However, I think someone should tell this comedian the office of the president is an independent body.
The senate and house leadership cannot agree on whether there should be a public option or whether to raise taxes on cadillac health care plans. And, the American people do not want a government takeover of healthcare.
So, word of wisdom to Franken, keep making us laugh while you serve.
As reported in The Hill newspaper, Kennedy calls Brown's election as "a joke", and derides Brown's decision to move up his swearing in by a week.
Well, the people of Massachusetts voted in an election, and the winner was Brown. Does Kennedy think the voters in his father's state are a bunch of nitwits? What does he think of Senator Al Franken (D-MN)?
Sure, Kennedy is upset that Brown cast a vote last night against President Obama appointee to the National Labor Relations Board, but that is his right now.
The people of Massachusetts voted for change. Accept it, Patrick. The Kennedy Era is pretty much ovah!
* * *
Congressman Anthony Weiner (D-NY) appeared on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart last night, and was asked, "Is [Senator Joe Lieberman] a dick?"
Jokingly, Weiner responded, "Yes, Jon."
In a week where we have also learned that White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel referred to wayward Democrat activitsts at "retards" last August in a private meeting with Democrats, what's happened to the Democrats' call for civility?
* * *
Speaking of Senator Al Franken, it's getting interesting watching this attack dog going after Obama for not laying the groundwork for easy passage of health care legislation.
However, I think someone should tell this comedian the office of the president is an independent body.
The senate and house leadership cannot agree on whether there should be a public option or whether to raise taxes on cadillac health care plans. And, the American people do not want a government takeover of healthcare.
So, word of wisdom to Franken, keep making us laugh while you serve.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
The Coming Political Showdown
If 2009 was a good year for President Barack Hussein Obama, 2010 will certainly be a year he will wish he could run away from as quickly as possible.
Yes, the latter half of last year proved to be a little bit bumpy, especially with the Tea Party movement gaining ground over issues on healthcare and the national debt. The elections of two Republican governors in November abruptly ended his third honeymoon, a feat never given to other presidents in their first year.
However, 2010 will be a political revolutionary year for both parties, and here's why. For one, the Democrats are scared as hell of losing power once again. And, it looks like the main reason is Obama, according to the pundits.
But, blaming Obama for all the Democrats' political troubles is merely a scapegoat. Congressional Democrats have no one to blame but themselves for supporting the leadership running that entire body.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is a miserable failure who acts like Mussolini while her counterpart in the senate, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) looks like a bumbling fool who's been hit about the head a number of times. Neither inspires confide, but they retain their power because nobody in their caucus are willing to stand up against them for fear of retribution through loss of appropriations and committee chairs.
Democrats, however fearful of their leadership, are increasingly concerned of the coming mid-term election because, as history shows, the party that run the White House normally loses control of one or both bodies in Congress. Remember the election of 1994 and 2006?
Last week's testimony before the House Oversight & Government Reform committee, Treasury secretary Tim Geithner faced a tongue-lashing not only by the GOP but by the Democrats regarding his role in the bailout of AIG and others.
Democrats are also becoming more interested with homeland security issues to appear tough on the security front. But, will all this be enough to avert what is projected to be a significant loss in both chambers come November 2nd?
It's quite clear congressional Democrats, like congressional GOPers under Bush, are distancing themselves from President Obama. However, perhaps Democrats ought to distance themselves from Pelosi and Reid, too. Talk about two divisive personalities who are willing to skirt the House and Senate rules to pass healthcare legislation with a bare partisan majority vote rather than a super majority vote.
Said Pelosi with respect to healthcare legislaiton on January 28, 2010: "You go through the gate. If it's closed, you go over the fence. If the fence is too high, we'll pole vault in. If that doesn't work, we'll parachute in. But we're going to get health care reform passed for the American people."
It's such language flying in the face of massive popular uproar that is hurting the Democrats more so than Obama's anti-business rhetoric. The view that the government knows better than the people is a foreign concept liberals have been trying to plant into the American mindset.
So, expect 2010 to be a very turbulent year in politics. As for the GOP, well, there are a few RINOs who could use a pink slip. McCain certainly comes to mind.
Yes, the latter half of last year proved to be a little bit bumpy, especially with the Tea Party movement gaining ground over issues on healthcare and the national debt. The elections of two Republican governors in November abruptly ended his third honeymoon, a feat never given to other presidents in their first year.
However, 2010 will be a political revolutionary year for both parties, and here's why. For one, the Democrats are scared as hell of losing power once again. And, it looks like the main reason is Obama, according to the pundits.
But, blaming Obama for all the Democrats' political troubles is merely a scapegoat. Congressional Democrats have no one to blame but themselves for supporting the leadership running that entire body.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is a miserable failure who acts like Mussolini while her counterpart in the senate, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) looks like a bumbling fool who's been hit about the head a number of times. Neither inspires confide, but they retain their power because nobody in their caucus are willing to stand up against them for fear of retribution through loss of appropriations and committee chairs.
Democrats, however fearful of their leadership, are increasingly concerned of the coming mid-term election because, as history shows, the party that run the White House normally loses control of one or both bodies in Congress. Remember the election of 1994 and 2006?
Last week's testimony before the House Oversight & Government Reform committee, Treasury secretary Tim Geithner faced a tongue-lashing not only by the GOP but by the Democrats regarding his role in the bailout of AIG and others.
Democrats are also becoming more interested with homeland security issues to appear tough on the security front. But, will all this be enough to avert what is projected to be a significant loss in both chambers come November 2nd?
It's quite clear congressional Democrats, like congressional GOPers under Bush, are distancing themselves from President Obama. However, perhaps Democrats ought to distance themselves from Pelosi and Reid, too. Talk about two divisive personalities who are willing to skirt the House and Senate rules to pass healthcare legislation with a bare partisan majority vote rather than a super majority vote.
Said Pelosi with respect to healthcare legislaiton on January 28, 2010: "You go through the gate. If it's closed, you go over the fence. If the fence is too high, we'll pole vault in. If that doesn't work, we'll parachute in. But we're going to get health care reform passed for the American people."
It's such language flying in the face of massive popular uproar that is hurting the Democrats more so than Obama's anti-business rhetoric. The view that the government knows better than the people is a foreign concept liberals have been trying to plant into the American mindset.
So, expect 2010 to be a very turbulent year in politics. As for the GOP, well, there are a few RINOs who could use a pink slip. McCain certainly comes to mind.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Where's the anger over the Haiti aid lateness?
The differences five years and two administrations make in regards to the reaction of the US media, elected officials and political activists over New Orleans and Haiti is undeniable. It speaks volume about the tactics that were played out in late summer 2005 and what we are seeing today.
For all the abuse President George W. Bush took over his handling of the federal response in the wake of Katrina, the untold number of deaths as a result of the flooding, the rumors that it was all a government conspiracy to weed out the black residents from the ninth ward, and FEMA's late response, all contributed to the sagging of Bush's approval numbers.
This, despite the fact that the federal government is not the first responder of sorts in any natural emergency or disaster, but rather it is the responsibility of the local authority and the state government to handle such matters as they see fit.
Regardless, the blood was in the water, and the press force-fed the idea that Bush was not up to the job of protecting Americans after all. Truly horrible. The vendetta was on, again. Bush had to be made an example of GOP incompetence, negligence and uncaring towards the poor minorities of New Orleans.
In the aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti, we see similarities with New Orleans. Black residents in desperation. Thousands dead, many injured and dying. Total infrastructural collapse. And, little to no government control.
Granted, Haiti, unlike New Orleans, is an independent nation. However, it's been over a week since the Caribbean plate rumbled, and humanitarian relief along with thousands of US troops have just arrived. The USNS Comfort, a hospital ship, has also docked in the capital, Port-au-Prince. Seven days it took, but they are there now, nonetheless.
Where's the outrage from the US media? Where are Speaker Pelosi and senate majority leader Harry Reid calling for an investigation into the late arrivals? Where is the manifestation of public anger at President Obama for not getting there sooner?
Frankly, I'm waiting to hear Minister Louis Farrakhan come up with a doozy, like say, the Mothership observed a United States Geological Survey vessel in the distance of the Haitian capital unload some super-secret depth charges causing the earth to shake violently so white crackers can re-colonize the black nation in order to transform it into a Club Med paradise for white blue-eyed devils.
But no. That's not going to happen. All's quiet in the American pressrooms. No visibly-shaken shouting Sheps. No dumb Kanye comment. No problems. Things are under control. The Democrats are in charge now.
But a Democrat governor, Kathleen Blanco of Louisiana, was in charge at the time of Katrina, as was a Democrat mayor, Ray Nagin of New Orleans. Right, both so-called leaders availed themselves to the comfort of safety while their own citizens were left to fend for themselves amid the ravaging storm and flood, leaving one leader, a republican, to take the flak for the combined ineptitude of two democrats.
For all the abuse President George W. Bush took over his handling of the federal response in the wake of Katrina, the untold number of deaths as a result of the flooding, the rumors that it was all a government conspiracy to weed out the black residents from the ninth ward, and FEMA's late response, all contributed to the sagging of Bush's approval numbers.
This, despite the fact that the federal government is not the first responder of sorts in any natural emergency or disaster, but rather it is the responsibility of the local authority and the state government to handle such matters as they see fit.
Regardless, the blood was in the water, and the press force-fed the idea that Bush was not up to the job of protecting Americans after all. Truly horrible. The vendetta was on, again. Bush had to be made an example of GOP incompetence, negligence and uncaring towards the poor minorities of New Orleans.
In the aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti, we see similarities with New Orleans. Black residents in desperation. Thousands dead, many injured and dying. Total infrastructural collapse. And, little to no government control.
Granted, Haiti, unlike New Orleans, is an independent nation. However, it's been over a week since the Caribbean plate rumbled, and humanitarian relief along with thousands of US troops have just arrived. The USNS Comfort, a hospital ship, has also docked in the capital, Port-au-Prince. Seven days it took, but they are there now, nonetheless.
Where's the outrage from the US media? Where are Speaker Pelosi and senate majority leader Harry Reid calling for an investigation into the late arrivals? Where is the manifestation of public anger at President Obama for not getting there sooner?
Frankly, I'm waiting to hear Minister Louis Farrakhan come up with a doozy, like say, the Mothership observed a United States Geological Survey vessel in the distance of the Haitian capital unload some super-secret depth charges causing the earth to shake violently so white crackers can re-colonize the black nation in order to transform it into a Club Med paradise for white blue-eyed devils.
But no. That's not going to happen. All's quiet in the American pressrooms. No visibly-shaken shouting Sheps. No dumb Kanye comment. No problems. Things are under control. The Democrats are in charge now.
But a Democrat governor, Kathleen Blanco of Louisiana, was in charge at the time of Katrina, as was a Democrat mayor, Ray Nagin of New Orleans. Right, both so-called leaders availed themselves to the comfort of safety while their own citizens were left to fend for themselves amid the ravaging storm and flood, leaving one leader, a republican, to take the flak for the combined ineptitude of two democrats.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Mopping Up the Democrat Mess
As the loss in Massachusetts begins to sink in for the Democrats in Washington, it's time for Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to apologize to the nation for playing gutter patisan politics over healthcare. Not that it's going to do Reid any good since he's clearly facing an uphill battle to keep his seat this year, but he ought to save face before it's too late.
Forget party politics. It's time the Congress face reality. The American people are disgusted with the tactics displayed over the past ten years by both parties. The voters are clamoring for change. Real change. Not verbal gimmicks.
The United States is yearning for a statesman or stateswoman to guide this ship onto its rightful course. It wants a leader willing to buck the establishmentarians and speak to the commoners as if he or she is one of them. A Joe the Plummer type willing to ask the right questions and provide the right answers. No political double-speak.
Last October, at a fundraiser in California, President Obama ordered the republicans to grab a mop and clean up the mess left by the previous administration. If last night's election of republican Scott Brown is any indication of mass discontent, in a Blue state of all places, it tells the Democrats in control of Washington the voters want them to grab a mop as well and clean up after their rancid legislative mess of 2009.
Forget party politics. It's time the Congress face reality. The American people are disgusted with the tactics displayed over the past ten years by both parties. The voters are clamoring for change. Real change. Not verbal gimmicks.
The United States is yearning for a statesman or stateswoman to guide this ship onto its rightful course. It wants a leader willing to buck the establishmentarians and speak to the commoners as if he or she is one of them. A Joe the Plummer type willing to ask the right questions and provide the right answers. No political double-speak.
Last October, at a fundraiser in California, President Obama ordered the republicans to grab a mop and clean up the mess left by the previous administration. If last night's election of republican Scott Brown is any indication of mass discontent, in a Blue state of all places, it tells the Democrats in control of Washington the voters want them to grab a mop as well and clean up after their rancid legislative mess of 2009.
Mr. Brown Will Go to Washington, After All
The Massachusetts special election is over. Senator-elect Scott Brown will now represent the Bay State. His stunning victory will provide the GOP with 41 votes to the Democrats' 59.
Meaning, the Nevada senator Harry Reid will either invite the GOP leadership into the negotiating table, or play hardball and pass all legislation with a senate budgetary maneouvre called Reconciliation requiring just a 51-vote majority.
In yesterday's blog, I mentioned that Brown must win by several thousand votes in order to avoid a Democrat hijacking. He won big in a state that has only 21 elected republicans compared to the Democrats' 178 in the Massachusetts House and Senate combined.
The Democrats are in disarray as they circle the wagon seeking someone or somebody to blame for their electoral defeat not only in yesterday's loss, but the losses this past November in the gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey.
With the Tea Bag movement in full battle mode, independents flocking back in droves to the GOP, and the 365-day Obama honeymoon over, 2010 will certainly be an interesting year in American politics as voters take out their hostility towards career politicians who created this miasmic economic conditions and a president who has absolutely no clue as to how to fix it.
Meaning, the Nevada senator Harry Reid will either invite the GOP leadership into the negotiating table, or play hardball and pass all legislation with a senate budgetary maneouvre called Reconciliation requiring just a 51-vote majority.
In yesterday's blog, I mentioned that Brown must win by several thousand votes in order to avoid a Democrat hijacking. He won big in a state that has only 21 elected republicans compared to the Democrats' 178 in the Massachusetts House and Senate combined.
The Democrats are in disarray as they circle the wagon seeking someone or somebody to blame for their electoral defeat not only in yesterday's loss, but the losses this past November in the gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey.
With the Tea Bag movement in full battle mode, independents flocking back in droves to the GOP, and the 365-day Obama honeymoon over, 2010 will certainly be an interesting year in American politics as voters take out their hostility towards career politicians who created this miasmic economic conditions and a president who has absolutely no clue as to how to fix it.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
The Special Election in Massachusetts
Scott Brown, the conservative Republican candidate attempting to succeed the late Ted Kennedy for a seat in the United States Senate from Massachusetts, may not succeed in today's special election if the Democrat machine in the Bay State manage to pull off a 50% to 49% "victory" for the Democrat candidate Martha Coakley, the current state attorney general.
For some weird reason, Democrats have won races that were too close for comfort where the conservative candidate was thought to have had the advantage coming in to the final leg of the race.
Most recently in the New York 23rd congressional district last November where the conservative Doug Hoffman was winning in the polls over the Democrat, Bill Owens and the liberal Republican, Dede Scozzafava. In the end, Owens barely eked out a victory with 50.0% of the vote over Hoffman's 44.7%. The problem in this race was Scozzafava, who having received the bad news that she was badly trailing Hoffman, endorsed Owens the weekend prior to the election. She received a paltry 5.3% of the vote, but just enough to give the upstate Adirondack seat to the Democrat, which hadn't been won by that party since before the Civil War.
Then, there was the upset in the Minnesota senate election in November 2008 where the incumbent senator Norm Coleman lost a heated race to comedian and diehard leftist Al Franken by just 312 votes after a lengthy recount and court battle lasting seven months. In the end, the vote tally for Franken and Coleman were 41.99% and 41.98%, respectively, with the independent candidate garnering 15.15%.
After a few weeks in which Brown, like Hoffman, was gaining momentum, another GOP loss will have voters pondering just what in God's name is going on at the local level where the votes are counted. There is a saying, that it's not how many votes are cast but who counts the votes. Are there enough Republican officials in the electoral precincts keeping vigilance in Massachusetts, especially in big cities like Boston, Cambridge, Fall River, Worcester and Springfield?
There is clear pandemonium in Democrat circles, and there is no telling what may be up their sleeves to protect what they truly believe in their hearts to be their senate seat. Ted Kennedy's beloved seat. Nevermind that, as Brown said in last week's only debate, that the seat actually belongs to the people of Massachusetts. This is all about preserving the Democrat party's political power at all cost, and if they must play dirty again, they will.
Democrat operative Ed Schultz said on his radio program a couple of days ago that he would be in favor of voter fraud if it helped Coakley. "Yeah, that's right. I'd cheat to keep these bastards out. I would. 'Cause that's exactly what they are," said Schultz.
Was Schultz, an ardent pro-union guy, sending a message from the Democrat establishment to the people of Massachusetts, something akin to union-bullyism: You better vote for Coakley or else?
Can one imagine what the uproar would be like if a Republican pundit, campaign or elected official had said that? Oh, the double standard.
So, although I am praying for a Brown win, I'm pessimistic enough to know that if he does not pull ahead tonight by several thousand votes, we may not know who actually won this campaign until next week or next month, God forbid.
Long enough by hook or crook to keep the current temporary occupier, Paul G. Kirk, Jr., in the senate to vote for ObamaPelosiReid Healthcare, Cap & Trade, Stimulus II and a host of other goodies favored by the White House and congressional democrats while Massachusetts Democrat officials miraculously find uncounted ballots left in poll watchers' car trunks.
If Bostonian Paul Revere were alive today, he'd be shouting this evening: The Democrats are coming! The Democrats are coming!
For some weird reason, Democrats have won races that were too close for comfort where the conservative candidate was thought to have had the advantage coming in to the final leg of the race.
Most recently in the New York 23rd congressional district last November where the conservative Doug Hoffman was winning in the polls over the Democrat, Bill Owens and the liberal Republican, Dede Scozzafava. In the end, Owens barely eked out a victory with 50.0% of the vote over Hoffman's 44.7%. The problem in this race was Scozzafava, who having received the bad news that she was badly trailing Hoffman, endorsed Owens the weekend prior to the election. She received a paltry 5.3% of the vote, but just enough to give the upstate Adirondack seat to the Democrat, which hadn't been won by that party since before the Civil War.
Then, there was the upset in the Minnesota senate election in November 2008 where the incumbent senator Norm Coleman lost a heated race to comedian and diehard leftist Al Franken by just 312 votes after a lengthy recount and court battle lasting seven months. In the end, the vote tally for Franken and Coleman were 41.99% and 41.98%, respectively, with the independent candidate garnering 15.15%.
After a few weeks in which Brown, like Hoffman, was gaining momentum, another GOP loss will have voters pondering just what in God's name is going on at the local level where the votes are counted. There is a saying, that it's not how many votes are cast but who counts the votes. Are there enough Republican officials in the electoral precincts keeping vigilance in Massachusetts, especially in big cities like Boston, Cambridge, Fall River, Worcester and Springfield?
There is clear pandemonium in Democrat circles, and there is no telling what may be up their sleeves to protect what they truly believe in their hearts to be their senate seat. Ted Kennedy's beloved seat. Nevermind that, as Brown said in last week's only debate, that the seat actually belongs to the people of Massachusetts. This is all about preserving the Democrat party's political power at all cost, and if they must play dirty again, they will.
Democrat operative Ed Schultz said on his radio program a couple of days ago that he would be in favor of voter fraud if it helped Coakley. "Yeah, that's right. I'd cheat to keep these bastards out. I would. 'Cause that's exactly what they are," said Schultz.
Was Schultz, an ardent pro-union guy, sending a message from the Democrat establishment to the people of Massachusetts, something akin to union-bullyism: You better vote for Coakley or else?
Can one imagine what the uproar would be like if a Republican pundit, campaign or elected official had said that? Oh, the double standard.
So, although I am praying for a Brown win, I'm pessimistic enough to know that if he does not pull ahead tonight by several thousand votes, we may not know who actually won this campaign until next week or next month, God forbid.
Long enough by hook or crook to keep the current temporary occupier, Paul G. Kirk, Jr., in the senate to vote for ObamaPelosiReid Healthcare, Cap & Trade, Stimulus II and a host of other goodies favored by the White House and congressional democrats while Massachusetts Democrat officials miraculously find uncounted ballots left in poll watchers' car trunks.
If Bostonian Paul Revere were alive today, he'd be shouting this evening: The Democrats are coming! The Democrats are coming!
Friday, January 15, 2010
Addressing the Haiti Problem Now, Not Later
Time magazine has a very compelling feature on the deteriorating situation in Haiti.
My heart and prayers go out to the people of that impoverished country.
Once Haiti begins to stabilize in the coming months with international humanitarian assistance the nations of the Americas and France will need to meet to find a solution or solutions to this quagmire of a country that hasn't developed economically since its independence from Napoleonic France in the early 1800's.
Since 1992, the United States has provided Haiti with $4B in foreign aid on top of billions more from other countries for infrastructure development. Where has the money gone? Why has there been a lack of accountability from the United States, France and the United Nations?
We can no longer continue to witness this nation in our own back yard slide deeper and deeper into misery thus affecting its island neighbor, the Dominican Republic, whom it shares a border with on the island of Hispaniola.
Haiti must change. Haiti must work. However, I do not think allowing the oligarchs to run Haiti again will be beneficial to any short or long term improvements. History shows us that allowing the Haitians to manage their own country's affairs will not help matters. It's far too corrupt. Far too inept. Far too poor. Far too complex.
The Americas can no longer allow the island of Hispaniola to have a failed state and a prosperous one living side by side. Such uncomfortable situations give rise to bitterness, disharmony and hatred towards the failed party and the people who allow it to happen. The Dominican Republic also deserves a better, more orderly and civil neighbor to its west.
Perhaps the time has come for France to dispatch its world renowned Legion Etrangere to impose order and civility to the people of this narrow stretch of land that have never experienced such ideals we take for granted in our own country.
What is also in order is the creation of a Franco-Americas Authority (under a United Nations mandate if possible) with the United States and France running the administrative processes, reforming the national police and army, and bringing in foreign investments under strict Authority regulation.
Certainly, such Authority is worth considering because the current situation is not working for either the Haitian people, the Dominicans next door, the United States, France and Latin America.
What's your opinion? I'd like to know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
