Ron Paul is a Top Tier Candidate!

So I normally laugh at Jon Stewart because he's funny but rarely ever correct. This time I wasn't laughing. It was the first time that Jon Stewart made me think rather than laugh. Is Ron Paul a top tier candidate? If not, why not? If so, can he win?

My opinion

I think Ron Paul should be taken far more seriously. The guy is smart, consistent, conservative, and right on almost everything (I'll even give him the benefit of the doubt (now) on the wars). I really think that I'd have a hard time deciding between him and some of the others in the race. He is the only one who can point to genuine/unique policy positions and he has NEVER flip-flopped. I wouldn't hold my nose to vote for him. I don't find him politically strong and I'm not certain he could win against Obama (which is the only reason I'd vote for anyone at this point). He would likely be laughed off is he did win the nomination and the media would ignore him out of the race (case in point). But if we had someone with his character and ideas in office he would probably make changes in this country that would be lasting and positive.

What do you think?

EDIT:
I like this video he's going to run. Ron Paul Ad - "The one who can beat Obama"

The Daily Show
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Join the conversation already in action at Google+

Cage Match Round 4: Jon Huntsman vs. Mitt Romney

Last week we saw Michele Bachmann edge out Herman Cain for Round 3 of our cage matches. She's proving to be quite the competitor and could be out for blood with 2nd quarter fundraising numbers coming out soon. Until then lets see what this week has to offer.

Image via WikipediaThis is the battle you've all been waiting for. Mormon vs. Mormon. Moderate vs. Moderate. Well coiffed vs. Well coiffed. The battle of the centu...er week is about to unfold in a wildly underwhelming battle for the middle of the road Republican...and the big prize of most electable.

In the blue corner wearing a Boston Redsox cap and a tie and weighing in with an impressive performance against a strong contender in Sarah Palin and a flawless national debate appearance we have the Massachusetts Mormon....Miiiiiitttt Romneeeey!

In the other blue corner wearing a Chinese flag lapel pin just below his American flag lapel pin and just back from a tour of duty in China for the Commander in Chief. The Utah man with a plan and a charming persuasion. Jaaaaahhhhhn Huntsmaan!

Image via Wikipedia Jon Huntsman Jr.This is sure to be one of the most impressive battles we've seen. Two moderates fighting to win a nomination that has the unfortunate test of conservative-ness. Mitt leads with a jab of name recognition. It seems to have landed unusually hard on Jon. Huntsman is trying to shrug that one off with a healthy infusion of daddy Huntsman's money. Mitt doesn't stop and throws a hard right of experience running a left leaning state. Jon takes the hard right remarkably well and counters with a solid blow of working for a far-left leaning President.  This could go on all night. Mitt pulls out all the stops and throws his comb out of the ring in an effort to remove the weight of his "plastic". He leans in and throws a huge blow with his fundraising connections. Jon stunned only slightly puts his multi-racial family on the edge of the ring and flashes a genuine smile.

Ding Ding! Round one was hard fought. Mitt is looking strong and Jon is looking confident...something must be up these guys long sleeve shirts to be standing so steady.

Round two starts. And there's a lot of preening and posturing as these two take another chance to size each other up. Romney throws the first punch with an effort to move the Utah primaries up...trying to win Jon's own state. Jon looks taken aback but counters by spending more time in New Hampshire trying to win Mitt's state. Both men take off their ties and look serious now. Romney pulls out his experience in the private sector creating jobs. Jon points out real tax decreases in Utah claiming the mantle of fiscal conservative. Both men look ready to make their final blow...leaning into a Rocky-Apolo Creed like punch using their common Mormon roots in prominent early follower Parley Pratt.

Ding Ding. Calling this at two rounds. Both men seem evenly paired and it's time to take it to the judges. Vote in the top right of the blog to decide who won this bout.

Cage Match Round 3: Michelle Bachman vs. Herman Cain

{EAV_BLOG_VER:71a66d9ec44006bf}Last week saw Newt Gingrich get soundly trounced by Rick Perry. The blood is still flowing with news of his campaign finance operatives bailing.
To make things a little easier I've decided not to do cage matches between announced and unannounced candidates anymore. So...what that means is that unless Rick Perry enters the race sometime this summer he will not be paired against another candidate in the later rounds. Which means that round 2 may be a wash...which is just as well given that only 6 people voted. Lets see if we can get more people excited with two Tea flavored candidates.
This week the match is between the Tea Party darling Michelle Bachmann and the Southern Firebrand Herman Cain. Let's get strait to the ticket.

Image via WikipediaIn the pink corner standing at a dainty 5' in heels carrying a nearly flawless record of obstructionist voting against the Democrats and weighing in with a flattering conservative rap-sheet that even Sarah Palin would relish the "mother of 5 and foster mom to 23" the strongest announced female candidate to run in the Republican Primaries...Michele the Minnesota Momma Bachmann.

In the blue corner standing a solid 6' 2" and weighing in with a couple dozen extra toppings of Tea Party vigor the first legitimate African-American Republican candidate and the man who's strength of passion is only second to the strength of his voice the Godfather of Tea-Parties everywhere...Herman the Huri-Cain.

Image by Getty Images via @daylife

Ding ding...Bachmann opens up with a strong New Hampshire performance and a quick jump in the polls. Cain counters with strong business cred and a powerful rhetoric. Bachmann shrugs it all off with a quick jab of political experience.  Cain takes it in stride by singing the National Anthem with a Tea Party fan.

Both of these candidates could go all the way.

Entering the ring strong Cain goes for the win with a huge hook counting on a 0% corporate tax rate. Bachmann strikes back with big fundraising numbers. Cain looks dazed after that exchange.

The last round here starts with Michele touting her position on abortion. Cain comes back with equally strong Christian support. Both candidates reach for the "historical" card and trip over each other trying to berate the media. They both manage to get up....ding-ding.

Alright so there isn't much here...but maybe you have something to add. Drop some comments on me and then  hit up the poll on the right.

Cage Match Round 2: Gingrich vs. Perry

Last weeks cage match between the heavy weights resulted in a surprisingly big win for Mitt Romney. So we'll see him later this summer as he takes on the winner of one of the coming matches.

This week saw Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry in the news...between fuzzy images of Anthony Weiner in varying degrees of undress. So this week we have a relatively short battle between Gingrich and Perry...again you'll get to pick who wins the the match by using the poll in the top right of my blog.

Image via WikipediaIn the Red corner weighing in with a hefty history of successful congressional leadership and a name that recalls better days of prosperity and Republican resurgence. The author of the Pact with America and the thorn in Bill Clinton's side....Neeewwwwt Gingrich!

Image via WikipediaIn the other corner wearing the Lone Star shorts and weighing in with the threat of succession. The man who may be the rebirth of Texas size national politics. The conservative who's playing both the Tea Party and Republican elite....Rick Perrrrryyyyy.

Ding Ding: Round one starts with a big swing of "Smartest Man In Politics" by Newt. Perry counters with three successful terms as Governor of the biggest state in America (Sorry Alaska no-one cares about you). Newt lays it on the line with a heavy dose of Fox News interviews. Perry looks dazed but pulls out his Rolodex of deep pocketed Texans. 

Round two: Perry is slow getting into the ring but still looks strong. Newt seems to be a little wary of Rick's deep pockets but stands up quickly. Newt punishes Perry with a barrage of name recognition and early entry into a long race. Perry absorbs it all and snags Newts top aides in the process. Folks this could be over before it even starts. Newt's clinging to the ropes with a Twitter campaign. 

Round three: Newt is still hanging in there despite a seeming second wind from Perry. These two are dancing the ring avoiding the appearance of being damaged. Perry steps up and embraces the Tea Party and Paul Ryan's plan. Newt is on his heels and tries a desperate move to the middle to embrace the independents. 

Ding Ding. This match is over. Lets see what the judges (that's you) have to say. 

Post your comments to vote or simply click in the poll widget in the top right of this site. Winner to be announced Sunday(Fathers' day)...so vote early.

Weinergate? Really?

From BigGovernment.com

Why the hell are we (conservatives) paying any attention to this. Sure he needs to resign. Sure he's a total douche. But this seems like a gargantuan waste of time. Democrats won't censure the idiot. The media won't focus on the issue. They'd rather follow Sarah Palin and complain of having to pee on the side of the road than acknowledge Anthony Weiners' stupidity. The media would rather talk about Andrew Brietbart and his vendetta rather than address the issue of Weiner's inane lies. Drop the issue and move on to the bigger issues at hand. Lets see more pressure on the President over his failed jobs plan. Lets see more pressure on the GOP candidates so that we have the best nominee this next fall. Lets focus people. Weiner is aptly named (or perhaps not so aptly named) and deserves to be lampooned in the late-night shows but he certainly shouldn't be taking our eye off the prize. The GOP win in 2012 is not going to hinge on this story. It is a flash in the pan. It may paint the Democrats poorly but it doesn't break Obama's grip on the reigns of this country running off the edge of a cliff. Let this blog post be the end of this particular news cycle.

GOP Cage match Round 1: Palin vs. Romney

Recently there's an unstated rivalry in the GOP primary race. This was brought to my attention today because of a couple of articles I saw. (here and here) This combined with my previous post breaking down the GOP candidates gave me the idea for one on one cage match analysis of two candidates per week. Each week I will give my readers a chance to express their opinions on the match up for the week and select the winner. The winner of each week will face off a winner from a previous week. This should take all summer long since there are so many announced and rumored candidates. Theoretically we'll have enough response from my readers to have a good idea of who the candidate should be at the end of the primaries. Of course we could find that my readers are lop sided, idealistic, or just plain wrong and then we'll just have been entertained for several weeks.

So the cage match for this week is arguably the battle of the heavy weights and I'd wager good money that one of these two will be the front runner by years end...of course I could be completely wrong too. I pit them against each other so soon in the process because they've already gone one-on-one this week and since only one of them is a candidate it seems fair to put them both in the ring as candidates to see who comes out. 

*cue Michael Buffer voice over*

In the Blue Corner standing at 6' 2" at an undisclosed weight and packing the baggage of mandatory healthcare coverage and a pair of flip-flops courtesy of the pro-choice Massachusetts political environment.  

We have the Massachusetts Mormon, the Brother from Boston, runner up in 2008 and a favorite of the middle -of-the-road-Republicans....Miiiiittttt Romneeeey!

In the Pink Corner standing 5'5" and weighing *slap* never mind...a girl never shares that. Carrying Tina Fey, a Governorship-cut-short, and a lip-stick wearing pig the Airhead from Alaska, the Tea-Party Pretty, the Patriotic Princess and the favorite of the hater-media and crazy-conservatives....Saraaaaah Paaaaaalin!

Round 1: Sarah opens the round by calling Romney to the carpet on RomneyCare on the very day he announces his "formal" campaign. Romney counters by proving he won't stoop to cheap theatrics. Palin pulls out the big guns and denies Romney coverage by having a clambake in the same state as Romney. Romney, on his heels, pulls up a giant wad of cash and slams it right into the retro-chic glasses of Palin. 

Round 2: Both candidates are looking strong. Palin skates around the ring on roller blades like any skilled hockey mom. Romney shuffles lightly in his patent leather loafers and un-buttoned long sleeve shirt. Romney starts the round with a sold hit with his big-business cred. Palin absorbs the blow by using folksy rhetoric. Getting into it now they both reach into their historical candidacy as the first Mormon and the first Woman Presidents if they win. This round is a draw.

Round 3: The candidates are showing signs of fatigue. Mitt has a single hair out of place and Sarah has some mascara running. Romney seems ready to end this with big name endorsements in the business sector. Palin reaches to her grass roots populist cred and paid gig on Fox News. This is gonna be a close one.
*ding ding*

Both candidates are standing tall. This is going to the score card.

Please leave your comments below and help me decide who moves on in the Summer GOP Cage Match. 

Think about this next time you fill up.

Gassing Up with Obama from RightChange on Vimeo.

Quick reference for GOP Candidates

I'd like to create a "hit list" of the positives and negatives of the top candidates (announced and not) for the GOP race. I'm going to try and hit the basics and then leave the comments sections for your input on the things that you think I missed.
In no particular order...at least not one that I care to admit.

Mitch Daniels, Governor of Indiana (not announced)
Pros:

• Fiscal conservative; lowered taxes and eliminated $200million deficit and turned it into a $1.3Billion surplus
• Strong history of results in a state that needed serious help
• Family values even in the face of his wife leaving him for another man then returning
• Rides a motorcycle :-)
• He's short :-)
• Excellent speaker 

Cons:

• He's almost exclusively concerned with fiscal matters saying that "social issues" need to take a back seat
• Slow to enter the race (this speaks to the ever elusive "fire in the belly")
• Not well known (this could be remedied if he gets himself some serious press coverage with outrageous populist rhetoric)
• He's losing his hair :-) (like I should talk)

Mitt Romney Former Governor of Massachusetts 

Pros:

• Legit business credentials that he can bring to the biggest economy in the world
• Governor of a liberal state (shows he can get things done with bipartisan atmosphere...better than Obama with both houses who barely passed Healthcare)
• Speaks well and isn't afraid to use red-meat rhetoric (this has changed from 2008)
• Family values (being Mormon actually helps here)
• Already dispelled "Mormon Issue" with his awesome speech in 2008
• Awesome hair and movie star looks ;-) tell me otherwise ladies.

Cons:

• He's Mormon...Yeah I still think there's folks that are that bigoted
• He has unquestionably flip-flopped on social issues...largely legit explanations but still gotta hang the summer footwear on his neck
• RomneyCare...he's gotta separate the difference between a State solution and a Federal solution we are a Republic and he's got to explain what that means to those who aren't smart enough to understand what that means

Herman Cain 

Pros:

• He's black...yup I think he will prove that the GOP is not racist and that as a Tea Party favorite he can unite the apparent division in the party
• Legit business credentials as CEO of Godfathers Pizza (He should be President because his chains gave me all you can eat buffets through high school)
• He's so right on all the issues social and otherwise 
• He's popular with the Tea Party, like it or not the Tea Party will dictate the discussion for this primary season
• He has the "fire in the belly" and to spare...when he speaks people listen and are informed, entertained, and convinced

Cons:

• He's black...yup there's a group of insane bigots 
• He will undoubtedly stick his foot in his mouth due to his being so flamboyant and unscripted
• He has no middle ground...he sees things in very stark terms and this will not win everyone over
• He's a Tea Party favorite...this will be something that the moderates and white collar Republicans won't like

Tim Pawlenty Governor of Minnesota

Pros:

• Very good Governor of a liberal state with solid performance and support from his own state
• Seems to ride the Republican planks like they were made for him
• Moderate on almost all issues but sufficiently conservative for even the furthest to the right
• Well groomed...this is important no matter what you say
• Socially conservative enough
• He's not Mormon...he is basically the Evangelical alternative to Mitt Romney

Cons:

• While he's given some spirited speeches he's not particularly powerful
• He's not well known...he doesn't seem to be able to correct this issue even with four years to try and correct the issue
• He is not well connected...money will have a lot of influence in this years campaign with Obama set to raise $750 million for his campaign

Michelle Bachmann

Pros:

• Enjoys broad Tea Party support
• She's got the "fire in the belly"
• She speaks truth to power in a way that is easily understood (rhetoric for the blue collar and red-neck)
• Her gender will help her gain notoriety and name recognition in the media overcoming the fact that most people don't know her name
• She's got the conservative planks covered REALLY well

Cons:

• Enjoys broad Tea Party support and for moderates this will be the sole reason for not voting for her
• She's "too" salt of the earth and may come off less serious despite her taking on serious issues
• Her gender will make her a target and there are simply some women/men who will not vote for a female President
• She's going to have "see Russia from my house" moments because she's so vocal about things

Newt Gingrich former Speaker of the House
Pros:

• The head of one of the greatest eras of prosperity in recent history
• Smart- he knows his stuff on just about every political topic out there
• Bedrock Republican meaning that he's what the foundation of the current Republican party was built on
• He's relatively well known and admired for his time as Speaker
• His connections are going to give him some help with money

Cons:

• He pissed off a lot of folks by knocking Paul Ryan's budget suggestions
• He's a Bedrock Republican and that means he's the foundation of the current Republican party...some say that's a bad thing
• Evangelicals still aren't going to be happy with his marital situation

Sarah Palin former Governor of Alaska

Pros:

• She about the most well known potential candidate out there after her entry as a celebrity in 2008
• The Tea-Party is her party and if she doesn't run her endorsement could be king-maker 
• She was a wildly popular Governor who was creative in finding real solutions to her states problems
• She's hot! She'd be the best looking President ever if she ascended to the throne in the Oval Office

Cons:

• She's a girl and that's going to be a liability for some voters...particularly Republicans
• The Tea-Party is strong but are they strong enough to move the whole Republican establishment?
• She is not liked by WAY too many people and she isn't going to be able to fix that easily

Ron Paul Congressman for Texas

Pros:

• Has got to be one of the smartest men in the Republican party
• His fiscal policies are exactly what America needs and no one, not even Romney, has made as well a reasoned argument on fiscal matters as Ron Paul
• He's Liberterian which means he'll bring in a voting block that is important to merge into the Republican party eventually

He has one of the most consistent voting records and has voted his conscience and not party line

Cons:

• He's cracked in the head. This guy still thinks we shouldn't have gone to war in Iraq or Afghanistan. The legality is beyond question. If you disagree let me know
• He's a Liberterian and there's a lot of fundamentalist Republicans that have forgotten about the Big Tent
• He's ancient as in just about dead ancient...agism aside he would be by a wide margin the oldest president in a first term and a second term would almost certainly be out of the question

Alright...that's my list. I know there's Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, Bobby Jindal, John Huntsman Jr., and there's still hope that Chris Christie will change his mind, but I'm sticking with this field for my purposes. If you've got more bullets that I missed for any of these or have another candidate suggestion leave it in the comments. Now hit up the poll to the right and tell me who you're favorite is.

Which economist is right?

This is an awesome video. "Economists say" is a common phrase heard in the media and this video puts two of the most notable economist in a "grudge match" over what theory of economics should be the policy of our government. At the end of the video pay close attention to the type of people drawn to each economist. Which type of person are you? Leave your comments below.

I'd also like to give a great big shout out to @freakonomics on Twitter. They directed me to this video. You can buy their books below.

Calls of Racism are a Red Herring

Image via Wikipedia
Some blacks see racism in 'birther' questions

Yes, that's an actual headline from the AP today. Here is my response to that article and the inane assertions it makes about those loony "Birthers".

As much as I dislike the "Birther" folks and as much as I think they're cracked in the head I still don't think they are racially motivated. I have yet to see someone categorically provide evidence that the "Birthers", the Tea Party, the Republicans, Conservatives, or anyone else labeled racist by the left, have acted purely or even mostly because President Obama is of African heritage. Naming someone racist because they feel like the policies and direction of this administration are wrong is a Red Herring and should be called out as such. 


In many ways it seems the President is trying to change the focus as much as the "Birthers". He claimed that the "Birther Movement" was taking the focus off of the economy...but the stories on the economy eclipsed the "birther" stories by several factors of 10...by bringing this stupid joke to the level of legitimacy that he has he removes the focus from him and the inept management of the economy to the idiots of the "Birther" movement. Good political move...sad...but calculated. Now the media would like to turn this into a racial thing rather than what it is...a calculated political maneuver to distract the public from the bad news on the economy. This collaborative effort on the part of the media and the White House is counter productive and only exacerbates the Presidents real problems in getting a split legislative body to correct the cumulative financial idiocy of the last 3 decades.

Below are some articles that seem to disagree with me.

Related articles

• Yes, Birtherism is Racist (As is Donald Trump): Three Videos Tell You Why - Source: AlterNet (curmilus.wordpress.com)
• Conservative 'Birther' Issue Is All About Racism (dekerivers.wordpress.com)

Gas Prices Climbing Toward $5 Per Gallon...HmHm President Obama?

Recently was reading the comments section of a news post that indicated $5 a gallon for gas by Memorial Day. The comments are from the right and the left. They are almost always extreme and rarely civil. The thing about the story that I found interesting is that they included a poll that asked "At What Price Point Would You Change Your Driving Habits?" with four options $4.50, $4.75, $5.00, and Never. I was looking for the already have option but they didn't have it. This surprised me a little. I have taken to riding my bike on nice days to work because it saves me $3 a day if my wife doesn't have to drop me off and then pick me up later, and I only live 2.5 miles from work. 
The comments section was all about politics...which is understandable since it seems like anything in the news these days is political. The part that I find political in the whole fiasco is that President Obama has escape the excoriation of the press on the rise in oil prices while President Bush was nailed in the news almost daily for failing to "do something" about the gas prices. When he suggested we'd start increasing our drilling prices dropped (of course by then they dropped because we were in a death spiral caused by the mortgage crisis too...but at least he tried something). President Obama has done the opposite of President Bush. He has a by-default ban on drilling in the Gulf and along the coasts. So not only are we subject to the problems plaguing demagogic states like Saudi Arabia, Libya, Yemen, etc. but we aren't doing anything at home to help ourselves with the problem. 
So now my question and the reason for writing this is to pose the question. At what point does the press/media turn on President Obama and start treating him the way they did President Bush? Will it be when he starts ANOTHER war? Will it be when gas hits $10 a gallon? Will it be when a terrorist attacks on his watch? Or will he have to get whiter, richer, and start using a southern accent?


Gas Prices Climbing Toward $5 Per Gallon « CBS Chicago

Government Shutdown...political planning.

I've been following the current budget process in congress (boring crap I assure you) and I've come to a conclusion recently. The current budget problem started the moment the Democrats saw the writing on the wall in the last election cycle. When it became clear that they would retain the Senate but lose the House they decided to punt on the budget. Why? For the political benefit of a Government Shutdown. How does this benefit the Democrats? The clear answer is that the Democrats stand the most to gain by painting the new budget cutting Congress as socially uncompromising and that they are willing to "starve" people in order to cut the budget. Democrats are counting on people to be dependent on Government programs so that they can leverage that for votes in the next election season. They are suggesting the funding Planned Parenthood is more important than paying our troops all while saying that Republicans are willing to let our troops go unpaid just to cut funding to NPR. The reality is probably somewhere in the middle. Certainly there should be cuts to every program. But the Democrats aren't willing to let the bastions of progressivism to get cut and so they will notch as many political points as they can by making the "unreasonable" Republican's out to be the "meanies" that don't want women to have breast exams. Does anyone really believe that any Republican doesn't want women to get screened for cancer? While I'm willing to concede that there are a lot of Republican's that would like to see liberal programs eliminated (PBS, NPR, Planned Parenthood, etc) to suggest that they want to see women die from breast cancer is hyperbole bordering on insanity. In the end the Republican's will be forced to break down politically because they care too much...not just about their political futures, but about the people that are suffering from the inaction that the Democrats calculated from last year. They calculated that they would gain more support for their "causes" by showing the "misers" as being heartless and willing to let VA hospitals shut down to save a couple billion dollars. They would show that they, the Democrats, are more caring and want to spend more on the "needy" than the Republicans, who are heartless and want suffering for the "little guy" and more money for the "nasty corporations" that cause all the problems in the world (that also employ the little guy...but you won't hear that).
Right now I want the Republicans to give in to the Democrats and start the battle for the 2012 budget today. I want them to fight for deep, punishing, painful, cuts to EVERY program. Every program means, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaide, Military (Defense), social programs, foreign aide, everything. I'm also an advocate for dropping EVERY loophole available to corporations and then cut their tax rate so there's no incentive to cheat, if they know they'll have to pay 25%, period, no exceptions, rather than being subject to 30-60% taxes on their profits with the potential to dodge that if they contribute to this fund or hide this much income, or give away that much product etc., then perhaps the end result will be more revenue for our Government.
So in conclusion to an extraordinarily long post I'll say this...Republicans in Congress...Stand Down...and then  grab your boot straps and get to work on next years budget and focus on winning the Senate and Whitehouse back. Don't let political planning on the part of Democrats prevent you from accomplishing that which you were elected to accomplish.

To see how ridiculous this is getting here's a couple links.
http://www.lifenews.com/2011/04/08/democrat-republicans-against-abortion-came-to-kill-women/
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/07/facebook-event-lets-dump-trash-at-boehners-pad/

Paul Ryan has a plan...now what?

Image via Wikipedia

Looks Presidential to me. You?

Do Paul Ryan has been an inspiration as a Freshman Senator from Wisconsin. He has been a leader and a voice of principle since the day he was sworn in. His most recent efforts for America have been astounding. The $6.2 Trillion budget cuts over the next 10 years are incredible. Everyone knew we had that much available to cut but so far not one person was willing to propose such cuts. The President has sat in his Oval Office and has proposed more spending and taxes and done mathematical gymnastics to show a $1.1 Trillion reduction over the same period. Ryan has proposed cuts that are as close to the bone as one would dare make in such a heated political atmosphere. He has no sacred cows and has cut from the military and reformed Medicare and Medicaid spending to make it more lean. He has avoided the elephant in the room, the aging dynamite that no one in their right mind would touch and that's Social Security. But in general he's gone through the books just like any other household and made the cuts needed to get America's balance sheet in the black. 

So all this effort (I know...he managed to put this together in a matter of months and we still haven't got anything meaningful done for last years budget) in getting our collective crap together and what does it all mean? Does it stand a chance once the bleeding hearts and the pork hungry get hold of it and start the debate? In a word, No.
Paul Ryan may be the man that saved America from the grip of economic ruin and his efforts are doomed from the moment he puts this in front of establishment politicians of every stripe. He speaks fluently the politics of personal responsibility and small government. The problem is that America hasn't got the collective will to stand behind him and force their political parties to come to terms on this budget. Too many people like being taken care of, too many people are happy being dependent. Paul Ryan and the committee he worked with to create this budget are heroes that will never see their day in the sun. To a person like me, that is the most tragic part of this whole story. Seeing light in our future just to come to the realization that it was not in fact a lantern on the horizon but rather a star in a distant galaxy and perpetually beyond grasp.
What do you think...does this budget stand a chance? If it does or doesn't do you think it should be passed?

Can Hillary win a Primary against Obama?

So President Obama is the first to declare a campaign for 2012. Of course this is mostly just semantics and technicalities since there are probably half a dozen potential GOP candidates and potentially a couple dissidents in the form of third party (Tea Party) candidates that could declare in due time. With all the speculation of who will match Obama on the Republican side there are some new speculations that Hillary Clinton may enter the race.
So now the speculation begins. How bad does it have to get for Obama before Hillary enters the fray? I just read a great article by John Phillips about how it's inevitable that Hillary will enter the race. His reasoning is sound and I suspect that if Libya becomes the mistake that most of the country believes it is, then Hillary- who has spoken out (and been mostly right) on the subject- may jump into the shark tank as perhaps the biggest fish.
The big question is can she pull off the upset? I think she is strong enough politically to pull it off but only in the event that Obama is weak enough politically. I think the budget crisis, the Libya debacle, and the fact that unemployment is still crazy high is enough to sour the public. The other half of that story could be the price of gas. Gas has more than doubled since Obama took office and his policies haven't helped much given the by-default moratorium on drilling in the Gulf and the wasted time on drilling in ANWR. If things don't make a dramatic turn in the next 6 months Obama may find himself behind in the primaries against a surging and strong Hillary Clinton.

Why we must cut the budget not tax the rich.

A big thanks to Ben Frisk who was so kind as to post this on Facebook. Much appreciated. I'm not going to get all Soap Boxy with this because it speaks for itself. I am going to say that the Republican's are in danger if they don't understand the facts of this video. Cuts must be made and reforms must happen or this scenario becomes the greatest failed democracy of history. Watch and be outraged...then demand that $1 Trillion gets cut this year alone and then don't whine if it means you don't get a handout.

Big thanks to Firewall (producer of the video) and Iowahawk the man behind the math. Awesome job!

$5 a gallon gas...or more.

So the last time we had a run on oil and the price per barrel was about $140 it was because people were greedy and the economy was strong(ish). Today the run on oil is a result of something even more powerful. Fear.
World events are on the brink of worse than chaos. Revolution in countries that the world economy relies on for its life-blood is anything but good. Libya generates a relatively small amount of the world supply of oil but the instability there and elsewhere in the area has given rise to speculation that Saudi Arabia could experience a revolution ala-Libya and Egypt. If that happens (and this is where the fear comes) all hell breaks loose. Between the fear of things that may or may not happen and the fear of things that are actually happening the price of oil is going to keep going up. Combine this with increased demand as a result of marginal improvements in the world economy (not so much in the USA...but elsewhere) and we have a real chance of things getting out of control. I recently saw an article saying we could see $15 a gallon gas. While I'm not sure about the idea of "peak oil" I do believe that the markets respond to world events.
So the next question...is this still Bush's fault?

Related articles

• "Gas Could Hit $5 Per Gallon Amid Continued Instability" and related posts (autoguide.com)
• $8 A Gallon Gas On Its Way? (theundergroundconservative.wordpress.com)

Wisconsin is about so much more than money

Tea-Party anger looks mild compared to a bunch of people looking at being forced to pay for benefits that most tax-payers are paying for themselves and for the union folks. I'm not saying that the unions are over paid and under worked. Union workers pay taxes. Unions don't...but the people they represent at the bargaining table do so I don't have any problems with union workers. The problem that we're seeing in Wisconsin is on the front of things about money and collective bargaining. The reality is that it's about so much more.
Wisconsin is in debt up to its eyeballs and the amount that they're talking about in this collective bargaining and the savings from the concessions they're asking for are a proverbial drop in the bucket. So no it's not about the money. The problem is that the unions represent a political funding source of the Democratic Party and as a result this is between the Democrats and Republicans and the battle for state and national dominance.
I'm not going to elaborate on who I think is right in this particular battle but I am going to say that I think unions have had their day...their advocacy for the people they represent is now way beyond the reality of protecting rights and ensuring safety. The days when unions represented fairness in the workplace are gone. Now they represent entitlements that put states and employers (GM, Ford, etc..) in a position where the majority of their overhead is covering items that most non-union employees pay for with their own money. By pitting tax-payers against other tax-payers they're creating a type of class warfare that has no winners, middle-class versus middle-class. The result is that the political classes further divide the country and the voters keep us in a stalemate the generates no improvement in our fiscal situation and thus doom us to a world where the greatest country in the history of the world falls the way of Rome. Is that what we want? Do you agree with me? Is there a way out of this spiral? Do unions need to fall in order for the Republic to stand? I don't have the answers...just my opinion. Share your opinion in the comments section below.

Related articles

• Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker warns of layoffs as unions step up efforts - CBS News (news.google.com)
• Beyond Wisconsin, This Could Be the End of Labor Unions (dailyfinance.com)
• Wisconsin governor doesn't budge on anti-union bill (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

How does Obama win a second term?

Recently there was a poll that showed Obama losing a second term in office. It got me to thinking of what it would take for Obama to win in 2012. I realized that it really won't take much. He just has to do as little as possible to put himself in the battles of the House and Senate. As long as he doesn't interject himself into the legislative process he's going to seem like he's neutral and the uninformed voters will give him the benefit of the doubt.

Obama is no dummy. He's going to appear to be outside the fray and as a result it will be the Republican's who are struggling to demonstrate results after getting the "will" of the people. When they fail to do that because the Senate shoots down everything the House passes the Republican's will be forced to try and make Obama the fall guy in order to pull off any kind of win in 2012. That's going to be a very hard thing to do if Obama manages to keep his mouth shut.

So now the pressure to stop Obama is on the Republicans. How do they manage the legislative process and defeat Obama in 2012? The road is perilous and involves finding their candidate for President early and unanimously. There needs to be a consensus candidate that emerges in the next 6-9 months and he/she needs to have universal support by the Tea Party faithful, and the GOP stalwart, while appealing to those who aren't socially conservative but want to see America with a path to fiscal sanity. Right now that candidate hasn't come forward. In addition to that they will also need to demonstrate that they can get democrats in the Senate to pass legislation that falls in line with Republican promises. There's almost no chance that happens if Obama doesn't want it to happen. His power in the Senate was seen when they managed to pass the Healthcare overhaul against all odds. So Obama is going to have to walk a fine line of influence in the Senate and neutrality in the process. He needs to create a strong backbone in the Senate while not appearing to be the brace that keeps them from bending. If he manages that, I don't see him losing against any of the Republican front runners unless things gel behind one candidate.

Tell me how you see Obama in office in 2013.

GOP Cost cutting deep

The GOP recently revealed their plan to cut $2.7Trillion in spending over 10 years (Yes that is a T). Does this mean we're on our way out of our national financial problems? Not if the Democrats have anything to say about it and they will have something to say. Without a majority in the Senate the GOP efforts to bring fiscal sanity back to the country are symbolic. What that really means is they already know this and they are going as dramatic as they can to try and build public support. The problem is that it's almost as likely to backfire as it is to help them. Of course the staunchest Republicans are going to support them in any and all of the cuts they've detailed. The problem is that while the independents got them into office on the promise of fixing the economy and bringing down the debt the reality is that they are just as likely to balk at some of the cuts that have been proposed. The GOP knows this and proposed them anyway forcing the dialog with the Democrats and if the Republicans are careful they can show "compromise" and still win...if they're not careful they'll stick to their guns and fail miserably and be accused of being "too partisan". This is an opportunity for our country to get back on track and perhaps dig out from the holes that were dug over the last 6 years. If the Republicans can navigate this tricky political maneuver and bring up a legitimate Presidential candidate they have a decent shot at saving us from the whims of China and our other creditors. Don't hold your breath though.

Related articles

• Will the GOP Deliver on Spending Cuts? (reason.com)

"itty bitty" political affiliations

I was reading a recent article on the Boston Herald (linked from Drudgereport.com) about Senator Brown in a Martin Luther King Jr. address and found it to be quite interesting in its implications. First of all the reason it was on Drudge is because it would raise eyebrows within the furthest Right of the Republican party. Many of them would be concerned that he diminishes his party affiliation and gives the impression that he is someone who could be a target of the Democrats in close votes. This is a valid concern since he has been one of the more malleable Republicans since taking his position in a shocker election last January. While many would see this treating his party as an after thought as a problem I see his speech in the larger context.
He was promoting the seating for the State of the Union address coming soon. Seating that forces Democrats and Republicans to sit next to each other is a great political symbol. The voters in general are fed-up with division and partisanship and even a relatively pointless symbolic gesture like this is going to speak to the populace. A strictly adversarial attitude as both parties have demonstrated lately is not going to get the public the results they expect. Republicans are in control (for now) because they offered hope that the spending, Obamcare, and deficit would be addressed and the sooner that Democrats embrace that the sooner bipartisanship can begin. Senator Scott Brown is trying to demonstrate to Republicans that the most important thing that they have to bring to the table is themselves and not their party affiliation. The "itty bitty" R or D that tells us the "team" they're on is not something that should exist because they're all on the same team America's team. It's about time they demonstrated it less in rhetoric and symbolic gestures and more in actions that benefit the country.

Hiding behind the news of the day.

The tragic shootings in Tucson this last weekend have the political world in an uproar.  Talk radio is on the rage because the liberals are blaming them or at least implicating them morally.  The politicians are either trying to upstage each other in their condolences to the families or their efforts to "find a solution" to this type of problem.  Has anyone thought about the real problems?  Not to make the tragic loss of life and senseless act of violence less important...it's very important to the people who are directly involved...but much less so to the country as a whole.  By making this tragedy a national issue they are taking off the table the real national issues.  China is testing a stealth fighter, getting ready to trade their currency in the US, and generally assuming the role that America once held unquestionably.  National unemployment is sickeningly high and there are no economic indicators that it will change any time soon.  The national debt (most of it held by China) is getting close to making our nation bankrupt.  Our borders are a no-man zone running wild with criminals trafficking guns, drugs, and people.  Our education system is losing ground to almost every developed country and most developing countries.  This list isn't short and it's only getting longer as long as our politicians continue to make national issues out of isolated incidents.  The news cycle on this apparently needs to make it long enough in the national story line for American Idol to start its new season.  Then we'll be talking about Steven Tyler and Jennifer Lopez and the next William Hung and this national crisis will still be played out on capital hill because "something must be done" and with have a dozen proposals and bills waiting to be debated this is the perfect thing to "do" instead of the things that really matter.

Related articles

• Fox's Future Hangs On Jennifer Lopez, Simon Cowell And Lots Of Dinosaurs (blogs.forbes.com)
• "Jennifer Lopez, Steven Tyler, Randy Jackson & Ryan Seacrest Visit the Tonight Show" and related posts (mjsbigblog.com)
• The Note: 2012 Politics Gets Tangled In Arizona Shooting Aftermath (blogs.abcnews.com)

Tragedy in Tuscon is made all the worse by politics.

Today 19 people were shot.  It doesn't really matter who they were or what they did because in the end human life was extinguished and the reason is still not clear why.  Several of the people injured or killed today were political figures.  That doesn't diminish the tragedy.  It also doesn't mean that politics should diminish their lives because they were for or against a particular policy.  A nine year old girl was shot in the back and died while heroes tried desperately to save her.  Several people died on the scene and others are fighting for their lives.  There's a reason that I don't mention a single person by name, even those with names that would mean something to people outside the families who are suffering right now.  There really isn't a good reason to name them.  They are people, humans, and they deserved life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and tragically it was taken from them by someone who didn't care or who was just as tragic as their victims.
Today there have been people from all walks of political persuasion that have been decrying this as a result of lack of gun control, lack of border security, Sarah Palin, tea party anger, the health care law, the list goes on and on.  Leveraging the tragic loss of life for political gain is tantamount to grave robbing.  Nothing is quite so despicable as political hacks one uping each other during a tragedy.  It makes things all the worse because we're left with bitterness at politicians instead of grief for the loss of life.  My heart goes out to those who are suffering right now.

Brilliant movie/cartoon

Thanks to David Price I was entertained by this incredible video that describes our modern banking system and economy in terms that are "South Park" like and yet inescapably simple.  It tells us how the world became dependent on credit and how our founding fathers wanted to escape the system that ruined Europe.  It shows how the economic crisis we're suffering now is really the result of centuries of economic foolishness.  It also does a fine job of demonstrating how the average American is ignorant of the Federal Reserve and it's beginnings and the impact that it has on our government and even our everyday lives.  I would suggest that you watch, laugh, and more importantly, learn.