THE ENTERPRISE--WHEN LEADERS LIE
HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE TRUTH IS--IN THIS ERA OF THE INTERNET? SCARY MISINFORMATION ABOUNDS.
It takes a lot of digging, and then you have to apply common sense and do some fact checking. Click on the link below and read a bit of it. Once you have, I bet you'll keep reading. Is it the truth now? It seems clear that both the mainstream media and VP Biden "lied" profusely either in their words or actions. Unless, of course you think this account is inaccurate. I can't confirm or deny it. If it's right, its disgusting, disgraceful and downright scary. My gut says it is mostly correct.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2009/07/10/reporter-we-took-sides-straight-simple-against-palin
SNOPES AND TRUTH OR FICTION
I check many of the things circulating on the Internet on Snopes.com. I recently was told that it was a "left leaning" group that filtered its responses accordingly. I cannot verify that either. Ironic, when the sites you search to find the truth, also "parses the truth." IF you want to see how differently the two sites treated the same issue, click on these links. IF NOT, just keep reading....
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/50lies.asp
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-lies.htm
LIES OR INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY--"IF IT WALKS LIKE A DUCK AND QUACKS LIKE A DUCK..."
One of the favorite movies I call to mind when truthfulness is in question is a Jim Carrey film named LIAR, LIAR. If you have not seen it, rent it and watch it. It is hilarious in parts, poignant in parts (yes, even a Jim Carrey movie) and humbling in parts. We all lie. We parse the truth. Recall Bill Clinton's famous line, "It depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is." But we knew he was lying.
LIES TO RIGHT OF US, LIES TO THE LEFT; "HERE WE ARE CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE AGAIN"
The allegations were rampant that either the CIA lied about WMD in Iraq, or President Bush lied about them. Which was it? Or perhaps, Saddam was lying all along, and he once had WMDs, and "disappeared" them to avoid UN inspectors, but didn't want to seem "weak" to Iran (that's the latest buzz anyway.) One of the most common lies told in business is told in the wake of a merger or acquisition when the acquirer tells employees (and other constituents) "nothing will change." Of course things will change--usually a lot of things--otherwise why bother to merge or acquire.
WHO CAN YOU BELIEVE? IT DEPENDS ON WHO SAYS WHAT, WHEN, AND HOW...
Now we are finding that the new administration of President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden have a very casual relationship with the truth--and with their promises and statements. Perhaps they are just falling prey to the old saw about "Figures don't lie, but liars figure." Or perhaps, it all depends on what assumptions underlie statements that were made. The following piece by Karl Rove (I know, all the Bush haters will tune out now) recaps the nature of the latest "truthfulness, or the lack thereof," issue.
NOBODY'S HANDS ARE SQUEAKY CLEAN
Right, there was the CIA vs. Nancy Pelosi. My bet is that Pelosi lied about never being briefed (a Clintonian technicality--it depends on what "briefed means" and the CIA practiced a highly professional level of deception, understatement and intellectual dishonesty. After all, they are "spies, " right?) The fortunate news for Obama is that the mainstream media still buys most of what he is selling "hook, line and sinker." Even they will, at some point, one hopes, become embarrassed at the obvious nature of Obama and Biden's "misstatements." We're waiting...
-----------------------------------
AND SO IT BEGINS...THE REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH--Part One (of many to follow)
House Democrats Plan to Tax the Wealthy to Pay for Health Care Reform
By David M. Herszenhorn
To pay for a sweeping overhaul of the health care system, House Democrats will propose a surtax on individuals earning $280,000 and up and couples earning more than $350,000, the chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee said on Friday. In all, the proposal is projected to generate roughly $550 billion over 10 years, which would cover about half of the estimated cost of the $1-trillion-plus health care legislation. The balance of the cost is expected to be covered by lower government spending on Medicare and other savings in the health care system.
But it remains unclear if the Senate would approve such an across-the-board income tax on the wealthy. Although some Democrats said they would gladly vote to tax the rich to pay for an improved health care system, most if not all Republicans and some centrist Democrats seem to be opposed. The Ways and Means chairman, Representative Charles B. Rangel of New York, said the surcharge would begin at 1 percent and would step up for individuals earning more than $400,000 and couples earning more than $500,000, and step up yet again for individuals earning $800,000 and up, and couples earning more than $1 million.
Lawmakers were also planning to insert language that would increase the surtax in 2013 if expected cost-savings in the health care system do not materialize.
----------------------------------
BEFORE YOU OBJECT, REMEMBER THE POOR 46 MILLION UNINSURED
But wait, 20+% of them, about 10+ million are here illegally; 1/3 of them make over $50,000/year and could buy health care coverage but choose not to; another 1/3 of them already qualify for either Medicaid or some other health care plan, but either don't know how, or don't bother to sign up; and 4-5 million are in transition between plans at any given time. That adds up to almost all of the 46 million. There are, at any time, probably 6-8 really needy people who can't get any kind of health care insurance ... or help. Thus the Congress and Obama administration want to re-design the entire system serving 250-300 million Americans to fix something that is really a problem for 3-5% of the people. Sounds questionable at best, manipulative at worse.
IMPLICATIONS FOR BUSINESS--ARE WHAT?
People ultimately consider what they get to keep of their compensation, and this issue bedevils compensation committees of boards and company executives all over the world. What combination of salary, bonus, stock, deferred compensation, benefits and perks make up the right "package" to attract and retain key people. Well, it depends on what the tax laws are--and this is a constantly changing scenario.
-----------------------------------
BELIEVE WHAT YOU WANT, BUT LIES ARE LIES, PROMISES ARE MEANINGLESS
Recall George H. W. Bush's famous, "read my lips, no new taxes." You know how that one played out. I already reflected on George W. Bush and Bill Clinton's most famous "whoppers." Now what? Are we cursed with leaders who must lie to get elected, and then do what they want or what they intended or what's expedient once they get in office? That is the question. Who can you believe? When? About what?
-----------------------------------
Obama Can't Be Trusted With Numbers
So why should we trust him with health care?
By KARL ROVE
In February, President Barack Obama signed a $787 billion stimulus bill while making lavish promises about the results. He pledged that "a new wave of innovation, activity and construction will be unleashed all across America." He also said the stimulus would "save or create up to four million jobs." Vice President Joe Biden said the massive federal spending plan would "drop-kick" the economy out of the recession.
But the unemployment rate today is 9.5% -- nearly 20% higher than the Obama White House said it would be with the stimulus in place. Keith Hennessey, who worked at the Bush White House on economic policy, has noted that unemployment is now higher than the administration said it would be if nothing was done to revive the economy. There are 2.6 million fewer Americans working than Mr. Obama promised.
The economy takes unexpected turns on every president. But what is striking about this president is how quickly he turns away from his promises. He rushed the stimulus through Congress saying we couldn't afford to wait. Now his administration is waiting to spend the money. Of the $279 billion allocated to federal agencies, only $56 billion has been paid out.
Mr. Biden has admitted that the administration "misread" the economy. But he explained that away on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" on Sunday by saying the administration had used "the consensus figures and most of the blue chip indexes out there" to draw up its stimulus plan. That's not true.
The Blue Chip consensus is an average of some four dozen economic forecasts. In January, the consensus estimated that GDP for 2009 would shrink by 1.6% and that unemployment would top out at 8.3%. Team Obama assumed both higher GDP growth (it counted on a contraction of 1.2%) and lower peak unemployment (8.1%) than the consensus.
Instead of relying on the Blue Chip consensus, Mr. Obama outsourced writing the stimulus to House appropriators who stuffed it with every bad spending idea they weren't previously able to push through Congress. Little of it aimed to quickly revive the economy. More stimulus money will be spent in fiscal years 2011 through 2019 than will be spent this fiscal year, which ends in September.
On Sunday, Mr. Biden, backpedaling from his drop-kick comments, said that "no one anticipated, no one expected that the recovery package would in fact be in a position at this point of having to distribute the bulk of the money." This fits a pattern. The administration consistently pledges unrealistic results that it later distances itself from. It has gotten away with it because the media haven't asked many pointed questions. That may not last as the debate shifts to health care.
The Obama administration wants a government takeover of health care. To get it, it is promising to wring massive savings out of the health-care industry. And it has already started to make cost-savings promises. For example, the administration strong-armed health-care providers into promising $2 trillion in health savings. It got pharmaceutical companies to promise to lower drug prices for seniors by $80 billion over 10 years. The administration also trotted out hospital executives to say that they would voluntarily save the government $150 billion over 10 years.
None of this comes near to being true. On the promised $2 trillion, everyone admits that the number isn't built on anything specific -- it's an aspirational goal. On drug prices, a White House spokesman admitted that "These savings have not been identified at the moment." It is speculative that these cuts will actually be made, when they would begin, or whether they would reduce government health-care spending.
None of this will stop the administration from arguing that its "savings" will pay for Mr. Obama's $1.5 trillion health-care plans. By the time the real price tag emerges, it will be too late to do much more than raise taxes and curtail spending on urgent priorities, such as the military. The stimulus package is a clear example of how Mr. Obama operates. He is attempting to employ the same tactics of bait-and-switch when it comes to health care, only on a much larger scale.
Mr. Obama has already created a river of red ink. His health-care plans will only force that river over its banks. We are at the cusp of a crucial political debate, and Mr. Obama's words on fiscal matters are untrustworthy. His promised savings are a mirage. His proposals to reshape the economy are alarming. And his unwillingness to be forthright with his numbers reveals that he knows his plans would terrify many Americans.
Mr. Rove is the former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush.
-----------------------------------
A VALUABLE PERSPECTIVE
Let me start by saying that I believe that we need two parties, and for that reason I would like to see the Republicans succeed. The GOP will not succeed, in my opinion if it stays on its current path, which includes:
1. Showcasing poster children that represent the past; i.e., Newt, Rush, Dick, et. el.
2. Forecasting President Obama’s downfall.
3. Rationalizing and Justifying past mistakes and behaviors.
4. Applying labels such as Socialist or Dictator to our President.
5. Criticizing without suggesting improvements.
6. Criticizing the person rather than the plan, policy or program.
7. Displaying fear of Rush Limbaugh (he’s not going to last).
The GOP needs to get its message out much more effectively. Phrases such as “Oh My God”, (reference to the budget) or “She’s a racist” won’t do it. Comments such as this make the situation worse. Ronald Reagan and William Buckley were great spokesmen for the Conservative Movement. These two men were the kind of communicators that are needed today.
Above all, the GOP needs fresh faces with sound ideas. Ideally, the best leader would be a sitting or former successful governor who has not been a patron of the failed administration or part of the Obama bashing crowd. When you offer constructive criticism, you need to address what questions, while avoiding why, who, and when. Let us know what the problem is and what you would do to solve it.
The fact is that the Republicans lost and lost big for good reasons. You need to address the question; “what did we learn and act accordingly?”
In short, complaining, criticizing, and forecasting doom will not do it. The Republican Party needs a major overhaul. This means fresh faces, appropriate leadership, and above all new ideas. It is going to take time and effort to accomplish this, but in the meantime the lessons of history tell us that this is the best approach.
This link appeared in Sunday’s NYT and illustrates my point. It is a good analysis and critique by experts of the current Administration’s policies toward the financial and business community.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/opinion/07cohanWEB.html?_r=1
I can recall a summer Sunday afternoon at the family picnic table as we listened to my uncle Larry, who owned the local Chrysler dealer in Bowmansville (outside of Buffalo). With a mouth full of mashed potatoes and waving a drum stick he would be railing against FDR, calling him a Communist, Socialist, and Tyrant while predicting the end of freedom and democracy.
I doubt that he changed anyone’s opinion on that beautiful sunny summer day or on the many occasions that followed. I do remember that we always listened politely, even when he would almost tip over the table as he tried to make his point. .That kind of behavior didn’t work over 60 years ago, and it won’t work today.
Best Wishes,
John Corbett, Founder, Learning International
--------------------------------
THERE YOU HAVE IT--FROM THE INTERNET, THE NYTIMES & WSJ, KARL ROVE, AND SAGE WORDS FROM A "NON-GOP OBSERVER".
Pick what you want to believe. Choose what you think is accurate. Do your own research, then form your own opinions. But whatever you do, make your personal and business plans carefully because the next year or two--or decade, will be a minefield of changes, new regulations, tax increases and other anti-business legislation. Smart business people simply must learn to adapt and adjust--otherwise, they are history.
Think about it,
John
"Government is supposed to work for the people; not vice versa."
-----------------------------------------------------------
John L. Mariotti, President & CEO, The Enterprise Group, Phone 614-840-0959 http://www.mariotti.net http://mariotti.blogs.com/my_weblog/
------------------------------------------------------------
Comments