THE ENTERPRISE--WHAT'S WRONG WITH THESE PICTURES?
I AM SITTING AWAITING WORD THAT THE PRESIDENT AND DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL LEADERS ARE ABOUT TO PASS A HUGE BILL THAT THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS DO NOT WANT.
I only hope that majority remembers how much these people considered their wishes and opinions. Find out who voted against it. Support them. Find out who voted for it and support an opposing candidate. The American people's first chance to really be heard is Nov. 2, 2010. Start the campaign now to make sure that "We the people" are heard, and our influence is felt.
A PRESIDENT THAT CANNOT AND WILL NOT ANSWER STRAIGHT MEDIA QUESTIONS
Bret Baier of FOX News attempted to interview President Obama. It was deplorable. No matter what straightforward question Baier asked, Obama answered something else. In the brief snippets I saw of the so-called interview it was Baier asking a reasonable question, and instead of answering it, Obama on at least two occasions told Baier "something else I knew" (or don't know), or alternatively, said 'I will know..." which directly says that he doesn't know NOW!. His so-called transparency is such a charade that it's no wonder the man has to use a teleprompter to make his speeches. Otherwise they would be meandering lectures--which is what his answers are to any live questions--and there is seldom an answer anywhere in the lecture.
A WONDERFULLY WRITTEN EXPOSE'
Rather than me writing more, I have pasted Peggy Noonan's brilliant and alarming column from this Saturday's WSJ. Remember when Richard Nixon said "I am not a crook?" Recall George H. W. Bush saying "Read my lips, no new taxes?" Certainly we all remember President Bill Clinton attempting to "parse the truth " in his comments on "..it depends on what the meaning of the word 'is', is..." We knew, in all those cases that the only reasons for those statements were to avoid facing the likelihood that they were not true. Now, our President, the golden tongued one, without his teleprompter, is exposed--painfully--by a persistent and artful journalist.
A SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE WHO "SPEAKS WITH FORKED TONGUE" (LIES)
Then there is the "Wicked Witch of the West" (you all know who that is right?) who doesn't bother with the truth. She's learned that she can say what she wants even if the fact contradict her. She said she liked the CBO "numbers" because those numbers are "certain." In their report, the CBO says quite the opposite, that their "numbers are not certain" and contain a large degree of uncertainty. She wants the sound bites to reinforce what she wishes were true, not what is really true. The health care plan is designed to be valued with TEN YEARS of revenue and only SIX YEARS of expenses. That's the only way to keep the real cost from American citizens. Finally, she wants to bend every rule to the breaking point--so much so that Rep. Cantor stood up and accused her of malfeasance. (Merriam Webster Dictionary Def.: wrongdoing or misconduct especially by a public official)
DEVOTING ATTENTION TO "WHAT'S WRONG" WILL HELP INFORM US ON "WHAT'S RIGHT!" (OR NOT)
Have you noticed how many indigents (like this man) have expensive cell phones (criminals love them, texting a favorite way to coordinate criminal activities). While we are giving more and more money to the underclass (and to destitute underprivileged nations), it somehow doesn't fix anything. Part of it goes into the pockets of the powerful and corrupt (and NO I am not talking about Congress). Part of it is wasted the same way they have wasted their lives--on quick, feel good hits, and NOT hard work, perseverance and character-building efforts. I used to joke (only partly) was that the reason taxes were so low in Tennessee (where I lived for 11 years) was that most of the welfare there was for the people to leave the cities and go back into the woods where they could live off the land, hunt game, stay in old decrepit cabins, and generally be better off than on the streets of the cities on welfare.
At least out there the attacks they needed to worry about were from coyotes and raccoons and the occasional bear--and not the two-legged vermin that got them on the streets. NOW--what IS WRONG with this picture?
WHAT ELSE IS WRONG? POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND PARENTAL ABDICATION/PARANOIA
In days gone by there were teeter-totters, big sliding boards, and merry-go-rounds in the park playground. More and more parents decided that they were not responsible for raising their children, teaching them values, the difference between right and wrong, and how to "be careful." Bib brother government needed to take care of the kids, so playgrounds were neutered. Anything remotely able to cause an injury was banned. Lawyers and lawsuits transformed makers of playground equipment into defendants. Schools became child care centers where keeping order and feeding kids was more important than teaching them. Of course parents couldn't be bothered with helping kids with homework, and teaching them how to do life activities like cooking, laundry, etc. That fell on the schools too. These life activity courses squeezed out real academics and surprise--test scores went flat or fell.
IRRESPONSIBLE CITIZENS AND DEPENDENT-CREATING GOVERNMENT IS WHAT'S WRONG
"The government needs to do something about that," became the cry any time any thing went wrong. The government regulates toys, playgrounds, cars, bicycles, and every other type of product imaginable. Does this make things better? Not really. Why? Because kids like risks and ask for (and get) skateboards, snowboards, roller blades, etc. Those who don't want the outdoor life, become couch potatoes, injuring their thumbs on Blackberries, Nintendo VS-i, and so forth. TV becomes their world. Exercise is relegated to gym class, taking more classroom teaching time away. Buses or parents drive kids to school and a myriad of outside activities, which have developed to replace what kids used to do after school--play outside with friends. The latest one: the drive to eliminate round hot dogs since they represent choking hazards. While they are at it, someone better develop non-round grapes too.
LIFE IS FULL OF RISKS AND CHALLENGES--BECOMING A COMPLETE PERSON MEANS LEARNING TO COPE WITH THEM
Of course, no one in the majority DC would agree with me on these points. It's their goal for government to take over more and more of our lives, and to take more and more of our earnings to pay for inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary government bureaucracies, controlling things that government had no business controlling. The final insult is that these bureaucrats earn way more than regular citizens.
WHAT'S RIGHT? A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS WHO AGREE THAT THESE THINGS ARE WRONG
I AM SITTING AWAITING WORD THAT THE PRESIDENT AND DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL LEADERS ARE ABOUT TO PASS A HUGE BILL THAT THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS DO NOT WANT.
I only hope that majority remembers how much these people considered their wishes and opinions. Find out who voted against it. Support them. Find out who voted for it and support an opposing candidate. The American people's first chance to really be heard is Nov. 2, 2010. Start the campaign now to make sure that "We the people" are heard, and our influence is felt.
A PRESIDENT THAT CANNOT AND WILL NOT ANSWER STRAIGHT MEDIA QUESTIONS
Bret Baier of FOX News attempted to interview President Obama. It was deplorable. No matter what straightforward question Baier asked, Obama answered something else. In the brief snippets I saw of the so-called interview it was Baier asking a reasonable question, and instead of answering it, Obama on at least two occasions told Baier "something else I knew" (or don't know), or alternatively, said 'I will know..." which directly says that he doesn't know NOW!. His so-called transparency is such a charade that it's no wonder the man has to use a teleprompter to make his speeches. Otherwise they would be meandering lectures--which is what his answers are to any live questions--and there is seldom an answer anywhere in the lecture.
A WONDERFULLY WRITTEN EXPOSE'
Rather than me writing more, I have pasted Peggy Noonan's brilliant and alarming column from this Saturday's WSJ. Remember when Richard Nixon said "I am not a crook?" Recall George H. W. Bush saying "Read my lips, no new taxes?" Certainly we all remember President Bill Clinton attempting to "parse the truth " in his comments on "..it depends on what the meaning of the word 'is', is..." We knew, in all those cases that the only reasons for those statements were to avoid facing the likelihood that they were not true. Now, our President, the golden tongued one, without his teleprompter, is exposed--painfully--by a persistent and artful journalist.
MARCH 20, 2010
Now for the Slaughter—On the road to Demon Pass, our leader encounters a Baier.
By PEGGY NOONAN
Excuse me, but it is embarrassing—really, embarrassing to our country—that the president of the United States has again put off a state visit to Australia and Indonesia because he's having trouble passing a piece of domestic legislation he's been promising for a year will be passed next week. What an air of chaos this signals to the world. And to do this to Australia of all countries, a nation that has always had America's back and been America's friend.
How bush league, how undisciplined, how kid's stuff.
You could see the startled looks on the faces of reporters as Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, who had the grace to look embarrassed, made the announcement on Thursday afternoon. The president "regrets the delay"—the trip is rescheduled for June—but "passage of the health insurance reform is of paramount importance." Indonesia must be glad to know it's not. The reporters didn't even provoke or needle in their questions. They seemed hushed. They looked like people who were absorbing the information that we all seem to be absorbing, which is that the wheels seem to be coming off this thing, the administration is wobbling—so early, so painfully and dangerously soon.
Thursday's decision followed the most revealing and important broadcast interview of Barack Obama ever. It revealed his primary weakness in speaking of health care, which is a tendency to dodge, obfuscate and mislead. He grows testy when challenged. It revealed what the president doesn't want revealed, which is that he doesn't want to reveal much about his plan. This furtiveness is not helpful in a time of high public anxiety. At any rate, the interview was what such interviews rarely are, a public service. That it occurred at a high-stakes time, with so much on the line, only made it more electric.
I'm speaking of the interview Wednesday on Fox News Channel's "Special Report With Bret Baier." Fox is owned by News Corp., which also owns this newspaper, so one should probably take pains to demonstrate that one is attempting to speak with disinterest and impartiality, in pursuit of which let me note that Glenn Beck has long appeared to be insane.
That having been said, the Baier interview was something, and right from the beginning. Mr. Baier's first question was whether the president supports the so-called Slaughter rule, alternatively known as "deem and pass," which would avoid a straight up-or-down House vote on the Senate bill. (Tunku Varadarajan in the Daily Beast cleverly notes that it sounds like "demon pass," which it does. Maybe that's the juncture we're at.) Mr. Obama, in his response, made the usual case for ObamaCare. Mr. Baier pressed him. The president said, "The vote that's taken in the House will be a vote for health-care reform." We shouldn't, he added, concern ourselves with "the procedural issues."
Further in, Mr. Baier: "So you support the deem-and-pass rule?" From the president, obfuscation. But he did mention something new: "They may have to sequence the votes." The bill's opponents would be well advised to look into that one.
Mr. Baier again: So you'll go deem-and-pass and you don't know exactly what will be in the bill?
Mr. Obama's response: "By the time the vote has taken place, not only will I know what's in it, you'll know what's in it, because it's going to be posted and everybody's going to be able to evaluate it on the merits."
That's news in two ways. That it will be posted—one assumes the president means on the Internet and not nailed to a telephone pole—should suggest it will be posted for a while, more than a few hours or days. So American will finally get a look at it. And the president was conceding that no, he doesn't know what's in the bill right now. It is still amazing that one year into the debate this could be true.
Mr. Baier pressed on the public's right to know what is in the bill. We have been debating the bill for a year, the president responded: "The notion that this has been not transparent, that people don't know what's in the bill, everybody knows what's in the bill. I sat for seven hours with—."
Mr. Baier interrupts: "Mr. President, you couldn't tell me what the special deals are that are in or not today."
Mr. Obama: "I just told you what was in and what was not in."
Mr. Baier: "Is Connecticut in?" He was referring to the blandishments—polite word—meant to buy the votes of particular senators.
Mr. Obama: "Connecticut—what are you specifically referring to?"
Mr. Baier: "The $100 million for the hospital? Is Montana in for the asbestos program? Is—you know, listen, there are people—this is real money, people are worried about this stuff."
Mr. Obama: "And as I said before, this—the final provisions are going to be posted for many days before this thing passes."
Mr. Baier pressed the president on his statement as a candidate for the presidency that a 50-plus-one governing mentality is inherently divisive. "You can't govern" that way, Sen. Obama had said. Is the president governing that way now? Mr. Obama did not really answer.
Throughout, Mr. Baier pressed the president. Some thought this bordered on impertinence. I did not. Mr. Obama now routinely filibusters in interviews. He has his message, and he presses it forward smoothly, adroitly. He buries you in words. Are you worried what failure of the bill will do to you? I'm worried about what the status quo will do to the families that are uninsured . . .
Mr. Baier forced him off his well-worn grooves. He did it by stopping long answers with short questions, by cutting off and redirecting. In this he was like a low-speed bumper car. In the end the interview seemed to me a public service because everyone in America right now wants to see the president forced off his grooves and into candor on an issue that involves 17% of the economy. Again, the stakes are high. So Mr. Baier's style seemed—this is admittedly subjective—not rude but within the bounds, and not driven by the antic spirit that sometimes overtakes reporters. He seemed to be trying to get new information. He seemed to be attempting to better inform the public.
Presidents have a right to certain prerogatives, including the expectation of a certain deference. He's the president, this is history. But we seem to have come a long way since Ronald Reagan was regularly barked at by Sam Donaldson, almost literally, and the president shrugged it off. The president—every president—works for us. We don't work for him. We sometimes lose track of this, or rather get the balance wrong. Respect is due and must be palpable, but now and then you have to press, to either force them to be forthcoming or force them to reveal that they won't be. Either way it's revealing.
And so it ends, with a health-care vote expected this weekend. I wonder at what point the administration will realize it wasn't worth it—worth the discord, worth the diminution in popularity and prestige, worth the deepening of the great divide. What has been lost is so vivid, what has been gained so amorphous, blurry and likely illusory. Memo to future presidents: Never stake your entire survival on the painful passing of a bad bill. Never take the country down the road to Demon Pass.
Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE WHO "SPEAKS WITH FORKED TONGUE" (LIES)
Then there is the "Wicked Witch of the West" (you all know who that is right?) who doesn't bother with the truth. She's learned that she can say what she wants even if the fact contradict her. She said she liked the CBO "numbers" because those numbers are "certain." In their report, the CBO says quite the opposite, that their "numbers are not certain" and contain a large degree of uncertainty. She wants the sound bites to reinforce what she wishes were true, not what is really true. The health care plan is designed to be valued with TEN YEARS of revenue and only SIX YEARS of expenses. That's the only way to keep the real cost from American citizens. Finally, she wants to bend every rule to the breaking point--so much so that Rep. Cantor stood up and accused her of malfeasance. (Merriam Webster Dictionary Def.: wrongdoing or misconduct especially by a public official)
DEVOTING ATTENTION TO "WHAT'S WRONG" WILL HELP INFORM US ON "WHAT'S RIGHT!" (OR NOT)
Have you noticed how many indigents (like this man) have expensive cell phones (criminals love them, texting a favorite way to coordinate criminal activities). While we are giving more and more money to the underclass (and to destitute underprivileged nations), it somehow doesn't fix anything. Part of it goes into the pockets of the powerful and corrupt (and NO I am not talking about Congress). Part of it is wasted the same way they have wasted their lives--on quick, feel good hits, and NOT hard work, perseverance and character-building efforts. I used to joke (only partly) was that the reason taxes were so low in Tennessee (where I lived for 11 years) was that most of the welfare there was for the people to leave the cities and go back into the woods where they could live off the land, hunt game, stay in old decrepit cabins, and generally be better off than on the streets of the cities on welfare.
At least out there the attacks they needed to worry about were from coyotes and raccoons and the occasional bear--and not the two-legged vermin that got them on the streets. NOW--what IS WRONG with this picture?
WHAT ELSE IS WRONG? POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND PARENTAL ABDICATION/PARANOIA
In days gone by there were teeter-totters, big sliding boards, and merry-go-rounds in the park playground. More and more parents decided that they were not responsible for raising their children, teaching them values, the difference between right and wrong, and how to "be careful." Bib brother government needed to take care of the kids, so playgrounds were neutered. Anything remotely able to cause an injury was banned. Lawyers and lawsuits transformed makers of playground equipment into defendants. Schools became child care centers where keeping order and feeding kids was more important than teaching them. Of course parents couldn't be bothered with helping kids with homework, and teaching them how to do life activities like cooking, laundry, etc. That fell on the schools too. These life activity courses squeezed out real academics and surprise--test scores went flat or fell.
IRRESPONSIBLE CITIZENS AND DEPENDENT-CREATING GOVERNMENT IS WHAT'S WRONG
"The government needs to do something about that," became the cry any time any thing went wrong. The government regulates toys, playgrounds, cars, bicycles, and every other type of product imaginable. Does this make things better? Not really. Why? Because kids like risks and ask for (and get) skateboards, snowboards, roller blades, etc. Those who don't want the outdoor life, become couch potatoes, injuring their thumbs on Blackberries, Nintendo VS-i, and so forth. TV becomes their world. Exercise is relegated to gym class, taking more classroom teaching time away. Buses or parents drive kids to school and a myriad of outside activities, which have developed to replace what kids used to do after school--play outside with friends. The latest one: the drive to eliminate round hot dogs since they represent choking hazards. While they are at it, someone better develop non-round grapes too.
LIFE IS FULL OF RISKS AND CHALLENGES--BECOMING A COMPLETE PERSON MEANS LEARNING TO COPE WITH THEM
Of course, no one in the majority DC would agree with me on these points. It's their goal for government to take over more and more of our lives, and to take more and more of our earnings to pay for inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary government bureaucracies, controlling things that government had no business controlling. The final insult is that these bureaucrats earn way more than regular citizens.
WHAT'S RIGHT? A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS WHO AGREE THAT THESE THINGS ARE WRONG
In coming editions of THE ENTERPRISE, we'll talk about more of what can be done, and how to start putting our states and our country back on the right track.
Best, John
Comments