THE SEVEN YEAR ITCH
(October 5, 2008)
The number seven seems to permeate the current political silly season. Seven years seems to be a recurring time frame and groups of seven seem to define the mess in which we find ourselves.
THE NEW 9/11: THE SEVEN YEARS wherein the Liberal Democrats succeeded where the 9/11 terrorists failed.
In September 2001, fanatical Muslim terrorists attempted to topple the U.S. financial system and the Twin Towers that embodied it.
They succeeded in bringing down the Twin Towers but failed to topple the U.S. Economy
In September 2008 (seven years later), Congressional Democrats completed their socialistic agenda's decades-long misuse of their own twin towers (and cash cows), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Their attempts to deny their complicity, to protect their party and to shield their Presidential nominee from blame for the resulting financial fiasco blocked any realistic chance of containing the damage to our financial system.
These Liberal Congressional Democrats succeeded not only in bringing down their own twin towers (Fannie & Freddie), but also succeeded where the terrorists had failed by dealing a crippling blow to the U.S. Economy.
Score: The Democrats - 1 The Country - 0
THE SEVEN DEADLY SINS: An Association Test wherein you are invited to match one from Column A with one from Column B.
Lust - Barney Frank (D. Mass.)
Greed - Chris Dodd (D. CT)
Sloth - Chuck Schumer (D. NY)
Wrath - Maxine Waters (D. Cal)
Envy - Nancy Pelosi (D. Cal)
Pride - Barack Obama (D. ILL.)
Gluttony - Franklin Raines (CEO Fannie Mae. OMB under Carter and Clinton and advisor to Obama)
(Hint to solvers: THERE ARE NO WRONG ANSWERS.)
Score: The Democrats - 2 The Country - 0
THE INNOCENCE OF THE SEVEN YEAR OLD: Wherein the Child is Father to the Man.
When Adolph Hitler marched into Poland, I was only 7 years old. Years later, had I the opportunity to socialize and work closely with him, I might have politely refused (possibly even impolitely) and if he'd offered to host my political coming-out party and do some fund-raising for me, there's a good chance I might have refused his help.
When 60's radical Bill Ayers began his public career as a terrorist by bombing New York City Police Headquarters, Barack Obama was only 8 years old.
When 60's radical Bill Ayers bombed the United States Capitol building, Barack Obama was only 9 years old.
When 60's radical Bill Ayers bombed the Pentagon, Barack Obama was only10 years old.
Therefore, Obama claims his close association with Bill Ayers years later is not to be regarded as a reflection on his own patriotism, his judgment, his political philosophy or his fitness to govern. Of course, this rationalization doesn't take into account the following:
When 60's radical Bill Ayers publicly expressed his regret for not having done more damage to the United States, Barack Obama was only 39 years old.
Obama never knew about Ayers' terrorist activities. Never knew, even while living in an area where Ayers was celebrated and idolized for his past. He never heard about it, never read about it, never realized that his benefactor, mentor and co-director was a detestable hangover from the ranks of the 60's anarchists, bomb-throwers, cop-killers and America-haters.
Just as the smartest woman in the world didn't have the faintest idea of what her husband was doing (or rather, having done to him) while they both lived in the White House, we now have this smart fellow who would use his wisdom and insights to govern 300 million citizens. The
same smart fellow whose wisdom and insight never provided him with the faintest glimmer into the heinous crimes of only one citizen, the acts of terrorism his friend, benefactor and fellow traveler had committed, admitted to and bragged about.
Score: The Democrats - 3 The Country - 0
THE SEVEN DWARFS: Another Association Test wherein you are invited to match one from Column A with one from Column B.
Bashful - Chuck Schumer (D. NY)
Sleepy - Bernie Sanders (I. VT)
Grumpy - Ted Kennedy (D. Mass)
Happy - Hillary Clinton (D. NY ?)
Dopey - Henry Waxman (D. Cal)
Sneezy - John Conyers (D. Mich)
Doc - Harry Reid (D. Nev)
(Hint to solvers: THERE ARE NO WRONG ANSWERS.)
Score: The Democrats - 4 The Country - 0
THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN: Wherein the Seven 'Masters of the Universe' were duped by The Seven Deadly Sins and The Seven Dwarfs (see above).
Score: The Democrats - 5 The country - 0
THE SEVEN WONDERS OF THE WORLD: Wherein I Wonder:
1. I wonder when the Liberal/Progressive, Socialist-Leaning Media will wake up and realize that their reward for blindly backing the Obama Manifesto could result in they, themselves, being destroyed by it?
2. I wonder when the Liberal/Progressive throwbacks will realize that their visceral hate for George Bush, the Military and business in general is at best childish, at worst treasonous, and that George Bush saved their asses in spite of themselves.
3. I wonder when the right will stop trying to make nice with the left? When will they learn that you don't defeat duplicity by encouraging it?
4. I wonder when the 60's crowd will grow up, stop looking for their lost youth, their lost causes, their lost hates and realize how their generation and its spawn have done lasting damage to this country that shelters them?
5. I wonder if the party that supports partial birth abortion and wants governmental control of a socialistic health care delivery system realizes that neither position promotes human well being?
6. I wonder why the feminists of the left (a redundancy) have so much hate for their country that they spew their venom on a successful woman simply because she doesn't support abortion on demand, the indiscriminate murder of millions of their fellow citizens?
7. I wonder if, at age 75, I will live long enough to see the rebirth of a Democratic Party that rejects the Clintonian principles of character assassination, dissembling and outright falsification, that stands for something other than the failed collective ideologies of the last several centuries and that reemerges as a vital and vibrant contributor to honest and intelligent political discourse?
A FOUR POINT PLAN FROM A FIVE STAR FOOL
"Bailout Plan Rejected, Markets Plunge, Forcing New Scramble to
Solve Crisis" (Wall Street Journal – September 30, 2008)
The current financial crisis was brought about by the Liberal Democrats, starting in 1977, when Congress enacted the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) under Jimmy Carter. Their 'redistribution of wealth' philosophy, straight out of the Karl Marx playbook, was further strengthened under Bill Clinton. The revised CRA regulations can be found in the May 4, 1995, Federal Register (60 FR 22156).
All of this culminated in Congressional action, forcing lending institutions to lower, if not eliminate, their credit standards. The penalties for non-compliance ranged from threats of being labeled as racist to punitive fines ranging up to $10,000 for each loan application in which 'discrimination' was found.
It's a damnable lunacy to look for these same Liberal Democrats to provide solutions to the very problems they created. They have made known their intentions to socialize our country, starting with schemes that would destroy the best Health Care delivery system on the planet. Their scheme for the Financial Markets in no less Socialistic and much more dangerous.
We do not need a trillion dollar + bail out. We don't need any more politics injected into the mix. Let the free market function freely. Where there is fraud, we have laws and courts where wrongdoing can be punished. Unfortunately, we have no such protection against stupidity.
If, indeed, the current problems are a poisonous cocktail of a liquidity crisis, a shortage of available capital and a shrinkage of available credit for Main Street and Wall Street, I propose a four-point plan, each piece of which is simple to implement, and carries no cost to the taxpayer.
1.INSURANCE - As Larry Kudlow was the first to suggest, raise the limit on FDIC insured deposits from $100.000 to $250,000. Benefit - Small Business Security
2.ACCOUNTING - Eliminate 'mark-to-market' requirements and allow holders of mortgage debt to value such debt at a price they can realistically anticipate in the future, not being forced to carry them at today's depressed prices. Benefit - Lenders and Borrowers
3.TAXES - Declare a temporary moratorium and allow U.S. Companies to bring back deposits from tax havens abroad on a tax-free basis. Benefit - Capital Infusion
4.CAPITAL GAINS - Eliminate Capital Gains tax on any sale of the mortgage-backed securities at the heart of the current problems. Benefit - Increase value of severely depressed paper.
As I am neither economist, financial guru, nor political genius, I am not implying that these are the only options. I'd just like to see our employees in Congress, the Regulatory Agencies and The White House address this problem by examining the full-range of remedies available.
THE UNITED STATES MARCHED TOWARD ITS DESTINY AS THE STRONGEST ECONOMY IN THE WORLD BY REMAINING FAITHFUL TO ITS CAPITALISTIC, FREE-MARKET ROOTS AND PHILOSOPHY. FOR GOD'S SAKE, DON'T ALLOW THE ULTRA-LIBERAL LOONS IN THE FAR LEFT FRINGE OF OUR COUNTRY TO DESTROY THAT WITH WHICH GOD HAS BLESSED US.
THE HISTORY LESSON - DEBATED
I received an email, criticizing ‘THE HISTORY LESSON’, a posting I made on Nov. 30, 2008 to a few web sites (including newt.org) copied from one of my blogs - IN THE REAR VIEW MIRROR. The sender took exception to most of what I had written and, while I object to the repeated accusation that I was “factually wrong”, the idea of being addressed as “dude” was far more unsettling.
As far as being “factually wrong”, I never claimed to be perfect. I thought I had made a mistake once, but I was wrong.
I have taken the liberty of repeating the offending piece below, inserting my critic’s verbatim, unedited comments and my own hapless responses.
Dec. 7, 2008
THE HISTORY LESSON
In a piece several months ago, during the more feverish segment of the 2008 Presidential campaign, I commented about Obama accusing McCain of trying to bring about the 3rd Bush term. I concluded then that I would prefer that to what Obama was promising, the 2nd Carter term. (I’ve even heard Christopher Buckley refer to it as the 1st McGovern term). Now, with McCain’s defeat, the former can’t come true and, with Obama’s announced selection of members of his administration, neither might the latter two.
The Obama assemblage of familiar names from recent history leads many to posit that he is slapping together the 3rd Clinton term. (The moment we hear that Monica Lewinsky has been named as Secretary of the Interior, we’ll know for sure.) However, Obama’s entering into an asexual ménage à trios with the Clintons in January 2009 will occur in a world vastly different from that of January 1993, when the Clintons sidled into the White House, courtesy of Ross Perot.
So, what has history to tell us about that difference and what might it whisper in our ear about Obama’s presidency?
1. CLINTON had won the White House with the support of only 43% of the voters, his victory aided in no small part by the 3rd party candidate, Ross Perot, garnering 19% of the popular vote.
OBAMA’s victory was less a blowout than many of his supporters expected, but he won convincingly, receiving 53% of the popular vote. Not exactly the mandate they were looking for, but a significantly more impressive win than Clinton’s.
CRITIC - 1. But a far greater Margin that (sic) George W in both 2000 and 2004.
RESPONSE - I referred to the fact that Obama received 53% (actually 52.9%) of the vote in an election where the only way in which the Democratic candidate could lose would be if there were photographs of him (or her) having sexual congress with a cocker spaniel while slapping a multi-racial adoptive child of a homosexual couple with one hand and holding an anti-abortion sign in the other. Obama ran a brilliant campaign, but he was never vetted by a compliant media, a media that now admits that it knows very little about him. Given all the realities of the then current situation, Obama’s percentage of the popular vote was not that impressive.
- CLINTON was handed a burgeoning economy, already on its way to record levels. After eight years, he handed off a declining economy, a recession to his successor, George W. Bush.
OBAMA will be greeted by a worldwide recession, at the root of which is the freezing up of the credit markets, caused principally by the Democratic Congress and their misuse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
CRITIC - 2. That's just factually wrong. Remember Clinton's campaign advice? "It's the Economy, stupid." Sure Bush Sr.'s raising of taxes did a lot to help shore up the "voodoo economics" of Reagan and Bush - but when Clinton came into office the economy was in the toilet.
RESPONSE - Perhaps I was not letter perfect in saying that “Clinton was handed a burgeoning economy”. However, the historical fact is that the U.S. economy had gone through some bad times in the early 1990’s and had bottomed out late in 1992. By the time Clinton assumed THE ORAL OFFICE in January 1993, the rebound was already underway. In effect, he was handed a recovering economy in 1993 and in turn, in 2001, handed off a declining economy to his successor.
Now, to the extent that we’re discussing history, let’s review the several factual underpinnings of the economic problems of 1990, 1991 and 1992. (We won’t even bother to mention the Gulf War, the resultant spike in oil prices and the effect on unemployment, deficits and GDP.) Does the Savings and Loan Crisis ring a bell? The failures of many hundreds of savings banks were a large contributor to our economic problems of the early 1990’s. These failures adversely impacted the U.S. financial system and the real estate market and were the result of “unsound real estate lending” according to Bill Seidman, chairman of the FDIC and the Resolution Trust Corporation. Congress also played a hand in this…..but, why worry about the past? This sort of thing - risky mortgages, congressional involvement, bank failures, chaos in the real estate market and the economy – could never happen again. Could it?
As a sidebar, history may also remember the ‘Keating 5’, five senators who were accused of influence peddling in connection with the S & L crisis, four Democrats and one token Republican. The Democrat-controlled Senate Ethics Committee cleared the lone Republican (McCain) and one of the Democrats (Glenn) of any impropriety, rebuking them for poor judgment, while the other three Democrats were either reprimanded or criticized for acting improperly.
Finally, I would suggest caution in equating a political slogan “The economy, stupid” with actual historical events. In 1976, Jimmy Carter promised to be “A Leader, For a Change” (and we know what we got) and, in 1984, Walter Mondale proclaimed “America Needs a Change” (possibly, but we didn’t need him). So, I guess it’s fair to conclude that the theme of ‘change’ in Democratic campaigns is not particularly novel.
3. CLINTON began his regime in a fairly peaceful world, the USSR no longer a threat. He was handed the ‘peace dividend’, the freeing up of large amounts of money which might otherwise have gone to Defense had Reagan not won the ‘cold war’. Despite a series of terrorist attacks on U.S. interests here (The World Trade Center in 1993) and abroad (Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia in 1996, the United States embassies in Dar es Salaam and Nairobi in 1998, the USS Cole in Yemen in 2000), Clinton engineered major reductions in our military strength and did little to carry the fight to the terrorists. (Aspirin factories don’t count!)
OBAMA steps right into the middle of a worldwide jihadist threat, with on-going U.S. military commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with Iran as an over-hanging menace. Fortunately for Obama, there is no longer an Arab-Israeli problem as Jimmy Carter solved that, as attested to by his Nobel Peace Prize……or, did I miss something?
CRITIC - 3. Again, factually wrong. When Clinton too office there was a war in Sololia, Iraq had a no fly zone, the jihad was as active then as it is now, the Balktic states were at war, etc. The Soviet collapse (which was economic, and Reagan had little to do with), brought more violence, not less.
Dude, if you're going to use the word "History" you should make a better effort to get the facts right.
RESPONSE - I’ll resist getting into an emotional pas de deux with a Clinton supporter who probably also suffers from a near-fatal dose of BDS - Bush Derangement Syndrome. I’ll also studiously avoid making sarcastic remarks about typos and misspelling from someone who claims to make his living as a writer, as well as references to places of which I have never heard (Sololia, Balktic States). I’ll only comment on Clinton’s willingness to take action.
Regarding the Bosnian Serbs ethnic cleansing in Sarajevo, Bob Dole, the Republican leader of the Senate, made continuous calls for action by the Clinton White House, urging Clinton to let the Bosnian Serbs know that “we mean business and we’re going to end the slaughter….It's time for the administration to step up to the plate." Even former Secretaries of State George Shultz and Ed Muskie urged the White House to deploy air power in Bosnia, calling Clinton’s U.S. policy "utterly bankrupt."
Clinton was reluctant to act, in spite of being pressured by both sides to do something to stop the carnage in Bosnia. Eventually he capitulated, probably emboldened by focus groups, and ordered high altitude bombing of Sarajevo. His actions do not evoke memories of Winston Churchill, Harry Truman or, dare I say, George W. Bush.
I’m also gladdened to see the admission that there was (and remains) an active jihad in the world, but do not recall any of Clinton’s focus groups leading him to take any direct and effective (read “politically risky”) action.
Finally, we have a first. In my 76 years, this is the first time I’m aware of being addressed as ‘dude’. Forgive me if I do not revel in the salutation, nor appreciate it.
- CLINTON had a less than sparkling 1st two years, taking a long time to put his team together and making several missteps before the biggest one of all, HillaryCare. It took Newt Gingrich’s ‘Contract with America’ in 1994 to regain Republican control of Congress, leading to Welfare Reform, tax reductions and the first balanced budget in decades. Lord only knows what might have happened in the Clinton years had the Democrats continued to control both the Legislative and the Executive branches.
OBAMA, in contrast, is assembling his team early and it’s not unreasonable to hope he’ll be ready to move immediately after inauguration. However, with the three tenors in the White House (Barry, Hillary and Bill) and the back-up singers in the Congress (Nancy and Harry), hope is not an easy thing to come by. Apprehension is more like it. And, while we were all alarmed about Candidate Obama’s ‘share the wealth’ philosophy, the spate of recent and impending bailouts of just about every failing enterprise Congress and the Administration could find, has already turned Washington D.C. into Moscow on the Potomac. President Obama will be hard-pressed to do worse.
CRITIC – had no comment on 4, so I assume he agrees that it took Newt Gingrich’s ‘Contract with America’ to help make Clinton a President.
So, how will Obama govern? The psychological and monetary costs of the current financial collapse will impede (if not completely negate) his ability to throw the taxpayers’ money at every social problem. His desire to move to socialization (if such a desire really exists) may not be capable of fulfillment. As to Iraq, he will inherit a winning hand from George Bush and there’s a good chance he’ll play it out. The last thing Obama could afford to do is to acquiesce to his lunatic far-left fringe, pull out of Iraq prematurely, and let history saddle him with the disastrous consequences certain to follow.
And how will he handle the Clintons? Quite possibly, we’ve been given a peek at the Hussein side of the Barack Hussein Obama gene pool. Is he acting in accordance with the old Bedouin admonition about it being better to have the camel inside the tent pissing out? Time, and history will tell.
“History is just one f**king thing after another.” Alan Bennett – ‘THE HISTORY BOYS’
November 30, 2008
From: IN THE REAR VIEW MIRROR