Thursday, October 25, 2012

Obama's "New Economic Patriotism" Equals the Failed Keynesian Economic Thought

I want to give Governor Mitt Romney credit for forcing President Barack Obama to develop his own plan for a second term, instead of focusing only on attacking Governor Romney.  However, President Obama’s “New Economic Patriotism” looks very similar to the last four years.  The President’s plan involves more government spending, more taxes, and more green energy crony capitalism.

President Obama’s plan for jobs and the economy is focused on two primary policies: more government spending and temporary government tax favors (tax credits).  The President likes to say his Administration has “invested,” or wants to “invest.”  Well, government doesn’t “invest,” private enterprise invests.  Government spends taxpayer money on pet projects and increases our debt to unsustainable and unaffordable levels.

The President wants to increase our debt $2 billion for community colleges supposedly to train 2 million new workers.  He also wants to spend money on “manufacturing innovation institutes” as a way to increase American made manufacturing products.  Free business from government shackles and they will have more of their own money to invest in the future of their own company, which will lead to the production of American-made products.  President Obama’s plan is focused primarily on creating manufacturing and green energy jobs.  Look for the President to increase spending on green energy companies like Solyndra and A123, and then watch those types of companies fail.  America cannot afford this unsustainable level of government spending and regulations, or we will see America become the next Greece.

Tax credits and spending taxpayer money on infrastructure, education, research, and technology make up President Obama’s tax and budget plan.  There is a huge difference in the way that Conservatives and Progressives view taxes.  Conservatives view taxes as your money.  Progressives view taxes as the government’s money; therefore, government has a right to tax it and take it from you.

Progressives view real tax cuts as liabilities, which is why they think tax cuts are the policy that increased the deficit in the first place.  Conservatives believe tax cuts lets you keep your money, which explains why we believe tax cuts are not a liability and that it is excessive government spending that increases the debt and deficit.  Tax cuts and tax reform is a real economic stimulus plan because it generates real economic and job growth in the private sector.

President Obama says he is for an “all of the above” energy policy.  However, the last four years shows he is focusing entirely on spending money on green energy infrastructure, and giving tax favors to failed green energy companies.  Using the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate and strangle the American economy to force us to use green energy is most important aspect of Obama’s green energy strategy.  In the President’s new plan, he gives lip service to all sources of American energy, but the specifics show that he is committed to green energy government spending and regulations.

President Obama keeps saying that he ended the war in Iraq responsibly, but the war really ended by the end of the George W. Bush Administration.  Mr. Obama was just the President who was able to bring our troops home.  However, I wouldn’t say it was a responsible end to the war in Iraq considering that the Obama Administration failed to complete a status of forces agreement with Iraq, and Al-Qaeda seems to be coming back.  The Obama Administration, in its first term, has also put an end to our missile defense systems in the former Soviet states, but you wouldn’t know that fact by reading Obama’s “new economic patriotism.”

Governor Romney’s plan on the other hand will expand North American energy by opening up North American energy markets to all sources of energy, rather than stifle American energy with crippling regulations.  He will also expand free trade around the world for American goods and services to compete and win in the global marketplace.  The Romney-Ryan vision will also cut the deficit and reduce the size and scope of government, not by raising taxes, but by reducing government spending.

Governor Romney understands that tax dollars are your dollars, and he has a plan that will broaden the tax base while letting you keep more of your hard-earned money.  Governor Romney also understands that small business generates job creation in America.  Therefore, his plan will roll back the excessive and burdensome regulations that President Obama has implemented that are stifling job creation in this country.  Governor Romney will cut waste in our defense and military, while strengthening our military and our national defense systems.

America needs leaders who understand that economic freedom is the real stimulus that America needs to get our economy working again.  Governor Romney and Congressman Ryan are those leaders who understand that Keynesian economics has failed to “prime the pump” and jump-start the American economy regardless of how much money government spends and prints.  They are also the leaders that understand that a free and strong economy puts America in a position of strength to promote the principles of peace and freedom around the world.  Come this November 6, let us go to the polls and vote for real change because we cannot afford four more years of Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Who Is More Presidential On Foreign Policy Issues?

In the foreign policy debates, coming across as Presidential and knowing enough about the international issues facing America to be a plausible Commander-in-Chief is the primary goal for Presidential candidates.  Presidential incumbents should win the foreign policy debate because they have so much more information on their side.  The pundits wanted Governor Mitt Romney to be specific, and to lay into President Barack Obama’s mishandling of the Benghazi terrorist attacks.  President Obama did exactly what people thought he would do: attack Governor Romney and try to get him agitated.  President Obama’s strategy didn’t work.

All Governor Romney had to do was be calm, and deliver a big picture vision of an American foreign policy.  He also needed to show that he had a solid grasp of foreign issues and crises, and would be a plausible Commander-in-Chief.  Foreign policy isn’t the place to necessarily distinguish himself from an incumbent President, unless there is a clear difference without attacking the sitting Commander-in-Chief’s decisions.

President Obama needed to try to make it a clear difference where he was portrayed as Presidential, and Governor Romney is portrayed as someone who doesn’t understand foreign policy issues.  Mr. Obama wanted to be seen as the adult at the table, while Mr. Romney would be seen as an inept politician.  In my opinion, it didn’t work.  Governor Romney was the one who appeared Presidential with a real vision for American leadership.

Everyone is saying that President Obama won that final debate, with Governor Romney doing better on the economy.  Maybe I’m just knew to the political scene, but I don’t get how they could think President Obama won.  He didn’t offer any vision, or answers to the Libya debacle.  All he did was attack Governor Romney with his usual lies and pettiness.

President Obama also did not come across as Presidential.  He came across as his arrogant and childish self.  He wore the contempt he has for Governor Romney right on his sleeves for all to see.  The President got agitated at Governor Romney, while Governor Romney stayed calm.  Long-term, Governor Romney won that third and final debate.  Governor Romney will improve his lead over President Obama and go onto win on November 6.

Conservatives, Libertarians, and Republicans don’t always agree on every single issue.  However, we do agree that we must do whatever it takes to defeat Barack Obama and take back the White House.  We can’t just defeat President Obama though.  We have to also take back the United States Senate and retain control of the United States House of Representatives.  If we are going to move America in the right direction towards eventually restoring the principles of her founding documents, we must unite and reclaim the Senate too.

Once Republicans regain control of both houses of the Congress along with the White House, then we Conservatives and Libertarians can put the necessary grassroots heat to force the Republicans to implement our agendas.  The first 100 days of a Romney-Ryan Administration and a Republican Congress will be critical in forcing them to cut spending, cap spending, balance the budget, and get the economy growing again with real fundamental tax code replacement.  Conservatives and Libertarians should come together to develop a 100 day unity agenda with cutting, capping, balancing, and replacing as our four policy goals.

Thursday, October 18, 2012

American Leadership and Peace through Strength and Clarity

The economy throughout this entire election has been the number one issue on Americans minds that was going to decide the election.  It probably still is the number one issue.  However, the failure to secure our embassies in Libya and Egypt, and elsewhere throughout the Middle East, which caused the deaths of four Americans in Libya, has put foreign policy and national security close behind the economy as the number two issue.  Over the past four years, America has seen a drastic decline in American leadership on international issues and crises thanks to President Barack Obama’s apology doctrine that seems to put third world Marxist nations above his own country.

President Obama seems committed to diminishing America’s role and leadership in the world.  His apology doctrine was on full display back in 2009 when he gave his Cairo speech.  The fact that he is slow to fight Iran, Venezuela, and Russia, who were America’s biggest enemies during President Bush’s Administration (Russia did fool the Bush Administration too), verifiably shows where President Obama focuses his foreign policy priorities.  However, he will vehemently oppose the foreign leaders that were actually helping President Bush and America fight terrorism in their countries, as well as the larger international community.

The Commander-in-Chief of the United States of America needs to be the leader of America, not of the world.  He needs to be able to put America and her interests first.  If it is in American interests to ensure that freedom and liberty is defended in other countries, then the President is to do whatever it takes to defend freedom.  America is the only country that is big enough militarily and economically to lead the world in defense of freedom.  The best way to ensure that America is in a position to ensure the torch of liberty remains lit around the world is remain in a position of strength, and to clearly define who our friends and enemies are in this fight for freedom.  The leader of the free world should also have a policy of clarity in America’s intention to do whatever it takes to defend freedom and liberty.

America is in desperate need for a leader who will reassert American leadership at home and abroad.  We must let our friends and allies know that we stand with them.  We must do what it takes to stop our adversaries and enemies.  The United Nations is a joke.  It doesn’t promote peace and human rights.  It gives the enemies of freedom and violators of human rights seats at a human rights table.  It gives America’s enemies a voice to spew out their hatred for America and for freedom.  If Governor Mitt Romney is elected this November, he should re-think the United States’ role in the United Nations and consider withdrawing from the international body of nitwits.  The United States military should be strengthened by eliminating waste and implementing new defense systems.

Governor Romney, if elected, should restore our global competitiveness as a way to maintain our strength around the world.  The number one way to strengthen our global competitiveness is to completely replace our current tax code with either the 9-9-9 Plan or the FairTax Plan to grow the American economy and make America more attractive for businesses to move to America.  The other step to making America more competitive in the world is to expand free trade and ensure that participating nations abide by the no-barrier trade rules.  The next President also needs to implement an energy independence plan that will make the United States and North America energy independent from oil-rich countries that hate us.  These policies will allow America to outgrow our competitors and enemies, which will put America in a position of strength to promote peace and freedom.

There are urgent threats that America needs to address that being in a position of strength will help us address those threats.  America cannot allow Iran to achieve the capability of developing nuclear weapons.  Islamist-fascist leaders cannot be allowed to control the Middle East region, or any region.  We have porous borders that allow people to skirt our laws, which allow terrorists to take advantage of our system to carry out their plans to kill Americans.  We should be an open and welcoming society of those who want to come here and seek better opportunities for themselves and their families.  However, we are also an independent and sovereign nation that has laws, so we must also demand that people abide by our laws.  America also has a more urgent threat than nuclear weapons being launch at us, which are Cyber and Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP) attacks.  A Romney Administration must develop a national strategy that will shield America against Cyber and EMP attacks.  Strength and clarity is the best and only policy to ensure that peace and freedom are defended and protected at home and around the world.

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

The President Is A Chronic Pathological Liar

Last night’s debate was a hard debate to watch.  Let’s face it, the President is a hard person to watch speak.  On a performance basis, the President did a lot better than he did in the first debate.  He was animated, aggressive, and on the attack.  All of the establishment pundits were surprised he was as aggressive as he was in a townhall-style debate.  It’s not all that surprising when you realize all he has is to be aggressive, and to attack Governor Mitt Romney.  What made it hard to watch was the flat out lies and misrepresentations that President Barack Obama used for his talking points.  How he can lie with such a straight face, and so often, proves to me that he has a medical condition of chronic pathological lying.  He can’t help himself.

President Obama didn’t stop at lying and misrepresenting Gov. Romney’s plans for America.  In his more aggressive and spirited debate performance, President Obama still never answered the questions and offered his own plans.  He still doesn’t have an agenda for the next four years.  The President also makes promises that were never intended to be the responsibility of the federal government.  He promises to hire 100,000 more teachers, but never explains how’s going to grow the economy so that we’ll have the money to be able to hire more teachers.

Governor Romney has the harder job than President Obama in this campaign.  President Obama can make lofty promises because in his Keynesian economic philosophy he can just spend and borrow more money to pay for his promises.  Governor Romney knows economics and money.  He knows that spending and borrowing to pay for things is not sustainable.  Therefore, Governor Romney has to get into the boring policy weeds of explaining policy, and hope the people don’t fall asleep.

President Obama’s solution to fixing the economy is to “invest” in solar and wind and other alternative energy sources.  Insert failed and bankrupted companies like Solyndra and A123, and then multiple those “investments” and multiple our debt and deficits by trillions.  What President Obama refuses, or just doesn’t care, to acknowledge is that the government does not make “investments.”  It spends and borrows money, and puts America deeper and deeper into debt.

He didn’t hit anything out of the park, but Governor Romney did maintain his momentum after last night’s debate.  His best moment and argument was when he recited President Obama’s economic failings of the last four years, listing fact after fact.  Governor Romney’s weakest moments were when he didn’t really explain why his plans would work better than President Obama’s, and on foreign policy questions regarding Libya.  It’s clear Governor Romney is at his best when he talks economics.

Yes, President Obama had a better night last night because he was more spirited and more aggressive in attacking Governor Romney.  However, he was still the vague-arrogant-pathological-liar that Americans have come to know.

20/20 hindsight is everything, but Governor Romney missed some big opportunities to put President Obama on the hot seat.  He should’ve brought up President Obama’s failed energy “investments.”  He also should’ve brought up the recent Libya hearings that showed that the Obama Administration failed to provide the necessary security in Benghazi when State Department testimony revealed that they denied requests for more security.  Governor Romney should’ve also focused on asking the President why it took his Administration over two weeks to get the Libya story correct if the President wasn’t hiding anything.

If we’re talking about content and substance.  Governor Romney clearing won last night’s debate because he talked about his real plans, and had the truth and facts on his side.  However, if we’re talking about performance, then it was a tie.  Governor Romney’s performance was about as well as he did in the first debate, so he didn’t hurt his momentum.  President Obama’s greatly improved performance helped him keep Governor Romney from expanding his lead.

Governor Romney will have a chance to sharpen his foreign policy plans and talking points for the third and final debate.  His foreign policy team should be giving him daily briefings on foreign policy and national security issues, as well as work with is speech writing team to sharpen and focus his foreign policy message to be more coherent and clear.

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Taking Responsibility for the Failures at Benghazi

Yesterday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took responsibility for the failures in Benghazi.  Why now?  For weeks, the Administration and the State Department hammered at the story that the anti-Islamic video was the cause of attacks and the murders.  When it was obvious that the attack was a pre-planned terrorist attack, they were forced to admit it.  Their new narrative then became that it was the intelligence community and the State Department’s fault.  Barack Obama is just the President and Commander-in-Chief; therefore, he’s obviously is too busy to be responsible for failures of his own Administration.  It’s someone else’s fault or failure.

Mrs. Clinton has taken the responsibility for the failures from Peru.  Even while she was in a foreign land taking the blame, the Administration still played the blame game by blaming the failures on “confusion” on what was the actual cause of the terrorist attack.  Who cares who’s to blame.  Figure out what happened and if someone was in the wrong, then punish him or her if necessary, but fix the problems so that it doesn’t happen again.  Real leaders don’t try to change the story by blaming others, they figure out what happened and make sure that it doesn’t happen again.

Why didn’t Mrs. Clinton call up President Obama the morning of September 12, 2012 to brief the President of the United States of America on the situation at the US Consulate in Benghazi?  That would have cleared up any confusion.  Regardless of what caused the attack, there was an attack that killed four Americans including our Ambassador.  The President needs to immediately be briefed on the situation telling him everything the State Department knows.  President Obama should then stay in constant communication with the State Department and the military regarding the situation in Benghazi.  That big failure caused a multitude of failures by the Obama Administration in Libya.

What did President Obama do though?  He went to the United Nations and rambled on about how a dumb video caused the terrorist attack in Benghazi.  The Obama Administration doesn’t seem to have really thought through the story his Administration had decided to push.  Do they think the American people are stupid?

Now that we know that the Obama Administration did know the Benghazi attack was a terrorist attack connected to an Al-Qaeda-affiliated group.  I think the attack shot a hole in the Obama Administration’s narrative that President Obama killed the leader of Al-Qaeda, Usama bin Laden, and by extension put an end to Al-Qaeda’s reign of terror.

In short, President Obama was supposedly the savior.  President Bush got us into two wars and couldn’t stop Al-Qaeda, but President Obama was able to kill Usama and stop Al-Qaeda in his first term.  Therefore, the Obama Administration decided to cover-up what they knew about Al-Qaeda in the Benghazi attack, so that they could hopefully maintain the narrative that President Obama did more to stop the 9/11 terrorist masterminds than did his predecessor.

President Obama is a very shrewd and calculating Marxist.  He will do everything in his power to be able to continue his Marxist agenda.  If there is anything that could jeopardize his mission, then I believe he will throw anyone under the bus just to achieve his Marxist agenda of destroying America’s leadership in the world.  I wonder how Mrs. Clinton feels about being President Obama latest person to be thrown under the bus.

Monday, October 15, 2012

A Vice Presidential Debate of Personalities

The Vice Presidential debate was clearly a debate between the personalities of Vice President Joe Biden, and Congressman Paul Ryan.  They both came well prepared with their campaign’s talking points, and presented their campaign arguments well.  Their talking points were substantive to a point, but their personalities overshadowed the content of the debate.  We can thank Vice President Biden for his shear arrogance and smirking for making the debate about personalities rather than ideas.

Mr. Biden was the arrogant bastard in the room.  President Bush’s 2004 debates and the 2008 debates are the only debates I’ve really watched (I was too young before 2004).  Compared to those debates, Mr. Biden was the most disrespectful of not only Mr. Ryan, but also the presidential debate process.

If you’re an ardent Obama supporter and a committed leftist, then Mr. Biden probably succeeded in energizing the Obama campaign’s base.  However, he didn’t say anything in his responses, and he continued Obama’s lies about the Romney-Ryan plans.  Mr. Biden’s shear arrogance turned independents off Mr. Obama.  In the long run, the rudeness that Mr. Biden displayed at Thursday night’s debate did the Obama campaign a disservice and might have cost Mr. Obama his re-election.

Mr. Ryan was the respected gentleman leader at the table.  I would have liked to see Mr. Ryan explain economic freedom and Conservative political philosophy better and more forcefully, but he did talk to the American people as adults in a respectful way.  Mr. Ryan did not have a knockout victory because he too didn’t say much of anything that could excite the American people to support the Romney-Ryan vision.

Paul Ryan was the winner of the Vice Presidential debate on Thursday night.  The polls that have come out afterwards seem to show a Romney-Ryan VP debate bounce.  There wasn’t much of a bounce to be a huge campaign success for Romney-Ryan, but enough of one to show that Mr. Ryan won the debate.  However, Mr. Ryan didn’t win because of anything that he said in the debate.  He won because Mr. Biden was the arrogant bastard.  The American people want to be treated like adults and be given real plans that address our nation’s real problems.  When a candidate is rude and arrogant, then the American people are going to stop listening to you and move towards your opponent.

Tomorrow is the second presidential debate.  It’s format is going to be a townhall-style format where some Americans will get to ask President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney questions directly.  Both candidates need to be able to connect with the audience and by extension the larger American audience.  Angrily attacking each other will definitely hurt their campaigns.

Based on what President Obama said in their first debate it’ll be clear that all it has is to continue to lie about the Romney-Ryan vision and hope the American people will eventually believe it to be true.  He can’t run on his failed record or he’ll most definitely lose his re-election chances.  Governor Romney needs to continue to be bold, respectful, and he needs not to let President Obama get away with lying about the Romney-Ryan vision for America.

The American people deserve presidential candidates that are bold in how they will solve America’s problems.  We don’t need politicians who will sugar coat our nation’s problems and offer up timid policies that won’t change a thing.  We are looking for serious leaders and serious problem-solvers.  The American people also want candidates and leaders to be respectful of each other even though they will disagree on policy directions.  We have seen too many politicians lie about their opponent’s positions just because they want to remain in power; therefore, Governor Romney shouldn’t allow President Obama continue to lie about the Romney-Ryan vision for America.

Thursday, October 11, 2012

Big Bird, PBS, and Big Spending Keynesians

Those of us who come from the Austrian school of economic thought want to cut federal government spending and balance the budget wherever we need to cut.  We believe that there are limited Constitutional roles for the federal government that we except spending money on, but we believe in cutting and eliminating spending on programs that were never the federal government’s responsibility.  The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) is one of those programs where the federal government should not be involved in.

Last night, LeVar Burton was on Bill O’Reilly’s “O’Reilly Factor” making the case that those of us who want to cut funding to PBS don’t get the broader problem, which is the education of the next generation.  Let me be very clearly, I like Mr. Burton.  I grew up watching Reading Rainbow, and reruns of Star Trek.  He seems like one of the nicest people, but he’s the one who doesn’t get it.

Let me try to put it as plainly as possible so that Mr. Burton might be able to understand the real problem.  WE’RE BROKE!  We don’t have the money to spend on programs like PBS.  We don’t even have 10 dollars to spend on PBS.  We’re borrowing money to spend money.  How is that sustainable?

All you Keynesians who say the federal funding that PBS receives are a drop in the bucket compared to our largest deficit problems.  That may be true, but every little bit that we can cut matters.  Except for big entitlement programs that are funded on autopilot, and not through the normal budgetary process, most of the federal government’s spending when looked at individually is a drop in the bucket.  However, if we look at all of the spending as a whole, then it adds up to a significant cost to the taxpayer.

Mr. Burton is correct to draw attention to educating the next generation.  My question is why isn’t he and others like him collaborating to do it themselves?  Why aren’t parents stepping up?  Why do they need the federal government to take on the responsibility of what used to be the responsibility of the parents?  The Founding Fathers formed a Constitutional Republic that would be limited to the defense and protection of the rights to life, liberty, and property foreign and domestic.  Education is not one of those responsibilities.

The best solution that improves education in America, and keeps federal government spending limited to its Constitutional responsibilities is school choice.  School choice puts education back into the hands of state and local authorities, and parents because people closest to an issue are generally best suited to address problems.  School choice also allows the federal government to focus on balancing the federal budget, eliminating unnecessary and unconstitutional responsibilities, and focusing on a limited list of duties like protecting and defending America.

When we have a stagnating economy, trillion dollar deficits per year, and a 16 trillion dollar national debt that exceeds our Gross Domestic Product (GDP), there should only be two priorities of the federal government.  Our leaders should first be focused on getting America working again by replacing the current tax code, and streamlining and eliminating unnecessary burdensome business regulations.  Their other priority should be paying off our debt, balancing the federal budget, and eliminating unconstitutional programs and agencies.  When will America be the land of opportunity and freedom again?