June 20, 2010
By Herman Cain
I know you are not going to believe this commentary, but try.
I am not going to read, watch or listen to any news stories about what is going on in this country for the next seven days. The only exception would be if I overhear someone mention that there has been another national or natural disaster. Otherwise, nada! Nor am I doing any of my radio shows.
I am taking a vacation from the problems of America.
For one week:
I will not hear another toothless Obama speech.
I will not hear another liberal try and defend the president’s mishandling of the crisis in the Gulf, mishandling of the economy and national security.
I will not hear or read another analysis of President Obama’s leadership deficiencies, and there are many such analyses including mine.
I will not hear about another spending proposal by the Democrats to stimulate the economy, even though the first spending binge did not work.
I will not hear another warning about the unsustainable spending by the president and Congress, which they continue to ignore.
I will not hear about another tax proposal introduced in Congress to prevent further damage to a stalled economy, only to be rejected by the Democrats.
I will not hear about yet another grenade discovered in the Health Care Deform legislation, which raises taxes and impedes our choices and our liberties.
I will not have to endure more congressional bashing of British Petroleum for pure political theater, which has produced absolutely no benefit to solving the problem.
I will not have to endure more deceptive stories about an economic recovery, the ups and downs of the stock market, or the economic pain of the 15 million unemployed people who are suffering because of presidential, administration and congressional incompetence.
The last time I did a national news detoxification was in 2004, and when I came back I had decided to run for the U.S. Senate in Georgia, because I could no longer sit on the sidelines and watch what was happening to this country even then without trying to do what I could do. We owe it to our grandchildren.
Although I finished an impressive second place in that Republican primary race in 2004, I have been defending the pursuit of happiness ever since through commentaries, speeches, radio and TV. Who knows what moment of insanity about public office I might have this time after my news detoxification. I’m just saying!
This country would be better off if the president, his administration and Congress would take an extended vacation for the next four months and nine days until after the November 2010 elections. We could breathe a little easier about cap and trade legislation until we elected a new Congress. Businesses and the stock market might react positively without the uncertainty of that job-killing bill hanging over our heads.
As for the federal operating budgets, just authorize federal agencies to operate at last year’s levels until further notice. That would be an automatic freeze in federal spending. What a novel idea!
There is one thing Congress should do before they take an extended vacation, and that is to make the current tax rates permanent. It would provide some much needed certainty about taxes, which would cause businesses to start growing their businesses again. Yes, we would then see some real job growth instead of imaginary and saved jobs.
If voters could persuade Congress to kill the cap and trade bill and make the tax rates permanent while I am on vacation from America’s problems, my return would be like waking up to a wonderful dream.
If not, I will be returning to the same national nightmare we are in right now.
June 20, 2010
June 13, 2010
Nobody’s in charge – Part 2
June 13, 2010
By Herman Cain
American’s number one expectation of its president is to keep us safe from our enemies. Our number two expectation is for the president to provide effective leadership in a crisis.
The Gulf of Mexico oil spill has gone from an ecological crisis to a human crisis for the families and businesses affected, and now a national crisis because of the consistent mishandling of the disaster, and the ripple effect of this disaster for decades to come.
I believe the mishandling of the oil spill is the combination of an ineffective management structure put in place by the president, as written about earlier, the standard bureaucracy when dealing with federal agencies, and now a blatantly obvious leadership void in the president’s abilities.
Byron York of the Washington Examiner pointed out that six administration agencies debated for three weeks the best approach for dealing with the disaster. A good leader would have been in the middle of the debate with all agencies involved to bring about a much earlier conclusion, which still has not been identified as the disaster is now in day 56.
Kirsten Powers, a self-described Democrat (for now), explained in the New York Post on May 27, 2010 that there was a plan developed in 1994 by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for dealing with such a horrific disaster in the Gulf. The administration was unaware or chose to ignore the plan.
Peter Ferrara believes the presidents’ mishandling of the crisis, and his administration’s indecision in not allowing Governor Bobby Jindal to build temporary sand barrier islands off the coasts is malfeasance (misconduct and abuse of power). The administration wants to study it and do an Environmental Impact Study.
Sand in the ocean does not kill anything. Oil does. What is there to study?
David Axelrod, the president’s top senior advisor, told NBC’s Meet the Press that the president is going to demand that British Petroleum (BP) create a special account with “substantial” reserves to pay oil spill-related claims. Accounting standards require BP to do this anyway, and the BP Board of Directors is the only entity representing BP’s stockholders that can demand BP to do anything.
Oops! I forgot. The administration has a severe lack of business experience (less than 10 percent of administration personnel have any) in addition to the unfolding tragedy of no leadership.
Axelrod also said on Meet the Press that the president is going to give an Oval Office address on Tuesday night after his return to Washington, and then meet with BP executives, including the oil company’s chairman, on Wednesday.
One would think that a speech to the American people might tell us more after his meeting with BP executives instead of a speech before he meets with them. One would think that a direct conversation with the BP CEO real early in the disaster might have yielded some better coordination in the Gulf. We know there’s no leadership, but a little coordination would have been a great start 56 days ago.
And then there’s the blame game. I thought President Obama would have at least waited until the oil disaster was under control before blaming George W. Bush and the Republicans, but he could not resist.
While trying to console some families of the people killed during the initial explosion of the oil rig, the president said “So I can’t dive down there and plug the hole. I can’t suck it up with a straw. All I can do is make sure that I put honest, hard-working smart people in place … to implement this thing.”
Mr. President, this thing is a disaster. Those smart people are not looking so smart, because nobody’s in charge.
By Herman Cain
American’s number one expectation of its president is to keep us safe from our enemies. Our number two expectation is for the president to provide effective leadership in a crisis.
The Gulf of Mexico oil spill has gone from an ecological crisis to a human crisis for the families and businesses affected, and now a national crisis because of the consistent mishandling of the disaster, and the ripple effect of this disaster for decades to come.
I believe the mishandling of the oil spill is the combination of an ineffective management structure put in place by the president, as written about earlier, the standard bureaucracy when dealing with federal agencies, and now a blatantly obvious leadership void in the president’s abilities.
Byron York of the Washington Examiner pointed out that six administration agencies debated for three weeks the best approach for dealing with the disaster. A good leader would have been in the middle of the debate with all agencies involved to bring about a much earlier conclusion, which still has not been identified as the disaster is now in day 56.
Kirsten Powers, a self-described Democrat (for now), explained in the New York Post on May 27, 2010 that there was a plan developed in 1994 by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for dealing with such a horrific disaster in the Gulf. The administration was unaware or chose to ignore the plan.
Peter Ferrara believes the presidents’ mishandling of the crisis, and his administration’s indecision in not allowing Governor Bobby Jindal to build temporary sand barrier islands off the coasts is malfeasance (misconduct and abuse of power). The administration wants to study it and do an Environmental Impact Study.
Sand in the ocean does not kill anything. Oil does. What is there to study?
David Axelrod, the president’s top senior advisor, told NBC’s Meet the Press that the president is going to demand that British Petroleum (BP) create a special account with “substantial” reserves to pay oil spill-related claims. Accounting standards require BP to do this anyway, and the BP Board of Directors is the only entity representing BP’s stockholders that can demand BP to do anything.
Oops! I forgot. The administration has a severe lack of business experience (less than 10 percent of administration personnel have any) in addition to the unfolding tragedy of no leadership.
Axelrod also said on Meet the Press that the president is going to give an Oval Office address on Tuesday night after his return to Washington, and then meet with BP executives, including the oil company’s chairman, on Wednesday.
One would think that a speech to the American people might tell us more after his meeting with BP executives instead of a speech before he meets with them. One would think that a direct conversation with the BP CEO real early in the disaster might have yielded some better coordination in the Gulf. We know there’s no leadership, but a little coordination would have been a great start 56 days ago.
And then there’s the blame game. I thought President Obama would have at least waited until the oil disaster was under control before blaming George W. Bush and the Republicans, but he could not resist.
While trying to console some families of the people killed during the initial explosion of the oil rig, the president said “So I can’t dive down there and plug the hole. I can’t suck it up with a straw. All I can do is make sure that I put honest, hard-working smart people in place … to implement this thing.”
Mr. President, this thing is a disaster. Those smart people are not looking so smart, because nobody’s in charge.
June 7, 2010
Liberals hate facts
June 7, 2010
By Herman Cain
Last week the political campaign propaganda season began, and President Obama fired the first shot at Republicans. In an effort to shift the subject from the Gulf oil disaster, the president went into campaign mode (again) when he said, "We can return to the failed economic policies of the past, or we can keep building a stronger future."
Unfortunately, the facts do not substantiate the president's claim when we compare December 2008 economic statistics before Obama took office to where we are today.
December 2008 June 2010
National debt $9.5 trillion $13 trillion
Gross Domestic Product , or GDP $14.1 trillion $14 trillion
Unemployment rate 7.2 percent 9.7 percent
Unemployed workers 11.1 million 15 million
As you can see, none of these statistics improved. They all got worse. But maybe it depends on one's definition of "improved."
The president and the liberals would also like for us to not remember that the $826 billion in stimulus spending was supposed to keep the unemployment rate below 8 percent. The unemployment rate has not been below 8 percent since the stimulus bill passed in early 2009. In fact, it has been consistently closer to 10 percent.
After the president declared in his State of the Union address last February that job creation would be a top priority, the number of government jobs has increased while private sector jobs have continued to decrease. Even when the administration was tempted to boast about the 431,000 new jobs created in May (oops!), we soon learned that 411,000 of those jobs were government Census jobs.
In that same speech, the president said, "We can't go back. We have got to move forward." You do the math! We are clearly not moving forward. Again, maybe it depends on one's definition of forward. On the other hand, maybe this is the direction the president and the liberals want to take this country – backward.
The president and the liberals said that the health-care deform bill would reduce the deficit and bring down health-care costs. After uncovering some of the administration's accounting gimmicks, the Congressional Budget Office has now indicated that the bill will cost $115 billion more than originally estimated over 10 years. That reduces the estimated deficit reduction to $28 billion.
If you think that will happen on a $1 trillion new bureaucracy, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you. It's being renovated!
The president and the liberals would also like for us to forget the fact that 63 percent of the voters want Obamacare repealed. This percentage has increased from 54 percent as people learn more and more about what's really in the legislation.
Ignoring the facts is one of the liberals' favorite tactics, because their agenda is not motivated by any facts at all. Their agenda is totally politically motivated for the purpose of concentrating more power to government rather than the people.
Campaign propaganda just does not work like it used to work. The facts are too compelling and easily accessible, and there are fewer and fewer uninformed voters. There are still too many clueless voters, but the intelligence trajectory is pointing upward. This is another encouraging sign for the elections in November 2010.
Unfortunately, the economic trajectory for the country is pointing downward, and the spending trajectory is pointing upward. That does not look like a stronger future as the president claims.
No matter how much the president and the liberals try to talk their way around the facts with propaganda and lies, the facts don't lie.
Liberals hate the facts.
By Herman Cain
Last week the political campaign propaganda season began, and President Obama fired the first shot at Republicans. In an effort to shift the subject from the Gulf oil disaster, the president went into campaign mode (again) when he said, "We can return to the failed economic policies of the past, or we can keep building a stronger future."
Unfortunately, the facts do not substantiate the president's claim when we compare December 2008 economic statistics before Obama took office to where we are today.
December 2008 June 2010
National debt $9.5 trillion $13 trillion
Gross Domestic Product , or GDP $14.1 trillion $14 trillion
Unemployment rate 7.2 percent 9.7 percent
Unemployed workers 11.1 million 15 million
As you can see, none of these statistics improved. They all got worse. But maybe it depends on one's definition of "improved."
The president and the liberals would also like for us to not remember that the $826 billion in stimulus spending was supposed to keep the unemployment rate below 8 percent. The unemployment rate has not been below 8 percent since the stimulus bill passed in early 2009. In fact, it has been consistently closer to 10 percent.
After the president declared in his State of the Union address last February that job creation would be a top priority, the number of government jobs has increased while private sector jobs have continued to decrease. Even when the administration was tempted to boast about the 431,000 new jobs created in May (oops!), we soon learned that 411,000 of those jobs were government Census jobs.
In that same speech, the president said, "We can't go back. We have got to move forward." You do the math! We are clearly not moving forward. Again, maybe it depends on one's definition of forward. On the other hand, maybe this is the direction the president and the liberals want to take this country – backward.
The president and the liberals said that the health-care deform bill would reduce the deficit and bring down health-care costs. After uncovering some of the administration's accounting gimmicks, the Congressional Budget Office has now indicated that the bill will cost $115 billion more than originally estimated over 10 years. That reduces the estimated deficit reduction to $28 billion.
If you think that will happen on a $1 trillion new bureaucracy, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you. It's being renovated!
The president and the liberals would also like for us to forget the fact that 63 percent of the voters want Obamacare repealed. This percentage has increased from 54 percent as people learn more and more about what's really in the legislation.
Ignoring the facts is one of the liberals' favorite tactics, because their agenda is not motivated by any facts at all. Their agenda is totally politically motivated for the purpose of concentrating more power to government rather than the people.
Campaign propaganda just does not work like it used to work. The facts are too compelling and easily accessible, and there are fewer and fewer uninformed voters. There are still too many clueless voters, but the intelligence trajectory is pointing upward. This is another encouraging sign for the elections in November 2010.
Unfortunately, the economic trajectory for the country is pointing downward, and the spending trajectory is pointing upward. That does not look like a stronger future as the president claims.
No matter how much the president and the liberals try to talk their way around the facts with propaganda and lies, the facts don't lie.
Liberals hate the facts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)