In general Presidents have their scandals some time after they have taken the Oath of Office, but I find it odd the number of things being thrown at President Obama before we have even gotten into the new year. I can't recall another President that has ever been faced with so many issues, before day 1.

Part of these problems are issues that come from the departing Administration. President Bush has left a minefield of economic missteps that need to be hurdled on day 1 running. The continuing requests of bailouts from various industries, and Congress' far to eager shoveling of public funds to them adds to that burden. And lest we forget, there are people out in the world that just want to see America burn, regardless of who is at the helm.

But there are a great many other issues that stem directly from President Obama, his Administration selection, and/or his past. Conflicts with Vice President Biden are anticipated, as is head-butting with Secretary of State Clinton. Rahm Emanuel is about as partisan as a skunk smells sweet, and I won't even get into the Mark Rich pardon fiasco.

Bill Ayers is regurgitating his old books that dote on a revised version of history that makes him and other terrorists seem nicer in retrospect. And he is starting to churn out more books to capitalize on the favor he provided President Obama by introducing him to politics in Chicago.

Now Gov. Rod Blagojevich is causing his own stink. So far it does not track back to President Obama, and if he is to be effective at all it must not. It's one thing to have Gov. Blagojevich sell the open Senate seat to the highest bidder, but if Tony Rezco is connected to the shadier dealings the Governor has made in the past, President Obama is sure to be dragged through that mud.

And long-time supporter Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. is about to learn the harshness of the media and Illinois politics under the bright national lights. I believe he may be innocent, as everything revealed so far shows no direct connection. But noting politicians of both Party's these days I wouldn't go to Las Vegas and make a bet on it.

In the past the media at least waited a little while before sniffing at the heels of a President. And it was the media's major help (or lack of investigation if you prefer) that fueled the win President Obama enjoyed. You would think they would give him the same kind of leeway they gave President Clinton and Hillary with Whitewater and the numerous other allegations (women) that dogged his Presidency [at least at first].

President Obama was elected under the banner of change. A change of entrenched politicians that do politics in the old-fashioned way - which has led to an Administration that is comprised of the people he rallied against. A change in the policies that we have followed for some time - to which we have proposals to increase the direct ownership and intervention of Government in private business at unprecedented levels. A change in taxation, leaning on the undefined rich more and bashing the oil industry - none of which will change at all. And most of all a change from a President that is seen as having interests opposed to the public at large - and we have gotten a look to the past and political influences of President Obama that could be far darker than what we have had before.

We have all this, and the Oath of Office is still over a month away. Somebody needs to give the man a little slack. Because he never championed, nor wanted, the media to change the way it attacks the President. He deserves the chance to prove himself, either the dream some believe him to be or the mistake others are stuck with.

Labels: Bill Ayers, Gov. Rod Blagojevich, Jesse Jackson jr, news media, President Barack Obama, Rahm Emanuel, Secretary of State Clinton, Vice President Biden

If in 3 years Osama Bin Laden publishes a book about his attack on the Twin Towers, and his work with Al Quida, would you buy it?

Simple question. I think that most Americans agree that they would not. So why then would anyone buy Bill Ayers book Fugitive Days?

Bill Ayers is releasing the book again after all the media attention generated by the Presidential election.



This media attention is being capitalized on as Ayers has his old book, and a new one, coming out. And in the old book, Fugitive Days, he has added a new portion that discusses his relationship with President Obama.



Now let’s look at what the book actually discusses

“Above all this is not a book for those looking for well-considered facts. This is not a book of dispassion. Some thirty years later Ayers is still trying to justify—as he did then—the core Weatherman belief that some forms of violence are tactically useful to achieve just ends.

…Ayers takes the reader through the townhouse destruction three times in the course of his memoir. His narrative opens with the explosion—or more accurately, his hearing about the explosion in a telephone call placed to a phone booth in a desert location. The second time he relates the explosion in the chronological context of his memoir. A third time he re-imagines the explosion and so reinterprets its significance. The whole point of his memoir, plausibly, is just to set the stage for that final re-imagination.”

So this book is the revisioning of fact, when fact is addressed at all. There is no remorse or apology. There is just the attempt to justify, and promote the ideals of a terrorist. And profit from that re-making of history.

The first try did not sell as well as Ayers hoped I imagine, as the book came out in 2001. It’s hard to justify bombing America when thousands of Americans are dead from a terrorist act. But Ayers is counting on the fact that the MTV generation is too busy to remember just 7 years ago.

I remember. And I understand what Ayers was trying to do in the 1970’s. He wanted to destroy the nation. And he thought his actions were not enough.

''I don't regret setting bombs,'' Bill Ayers said. ''I feel we didn't do enough.''

So I ask you, would you buy a book by an admitted terrorist who has no remorse? Would you help promote the ideals of a terrorist, and provide them profit? Because if so, you would buy a book by Bill Ayers. And that is no different than shaking Osama Bin Laden’s hand and handing him a check over the ruins of the Twin Towers.

If you disagree I’d like to hear why.

But no matter what, I suggest that all my readers, all your friends and co-workers, all Americans boycott the books of Ayers. If you support that I’d really like to hear your comments as well.

Labels: 9/11, Bill Ayers, Fugitive Days, osama bin laden, terrorism, Twin Towers

In watching and reflecting on the 3rd and last Presidential debate of 2008 there are a few immediate thoughts that come to my mind, a more detailed review will come tomorrow. The foremost is the thought that 3 debates, and only 1 for the Vice Presidential candidates, is far too few to really convey to the public the issues facing the nation. The next is that there were several inaccuracies by both of the candidates. And I have to say that this debate was by far the best of the 3.

Going beyond that I have to say that Senator Obama was very eloquent. His ability to debate is quite impressive. He made no major mistakes, and was very sure of his answers.

Yet I think that his answers were stylized and edited polispeak. He had poor answers to several subjects, which if you just listened in a cursory manner, or only heard him speak once, you might have missed. In fact if you have followed the campaigns since before the Primaries, as I have, you would find fault with several subject he spoke on.

Senator McCain was a bit more fiery at points tonight. It was invigorating when he got on the attack, which he has needed to do for some time. But at several points he disappointed as well. While he was less edited in his answers, he also failed to close a subject definitively several times. And he made a major gaff, in my opinion, when he was surprised by the answer of Senator Obama about the cost of healthcare on small businesses.

And speaking of Joe Wurzelbacher I’m not surprised that Obama did not want to discuss him much. The fact is that Obama has clearly stated that he wants to effectively cap the income Americans can make. That he will take money to redistribute to whatever he believes is best. That he does not trust the ability of individual Americans to use their wealth to the benefit of their families and the nation – preferring instead to grow a larger government that will oversee such decisions.

And by the way, Joe the plumber was not swayed by the argument of Obama. In fact he has clearly stated that he will not vote for Obama. Because the tax plans of Obama will mean that in buying the company he will lose money as Obama increases the corporate tax, personal tax, and capital gains tax nullifying future investments. Which means that Obama will either stifle growth of small businesses, or cause those businesses to fire or reduce the hours of workers just to pay the increased taxes.

Another fault of Obama, and this is more the problem of Democrats in general, was his insistence on being firmly focused on the past. He is fixated on placing blame, and living in the past descisions of President Bush. This lead to the best line for McCain

“I’m not President Bush. If you want to run against him you should have run 4 years ago.”

But McCain did not stay consistent in his strength. He failed to demand a clarification on William Ayers, which was never provided. The man was a terrorist, and it is unclear how much influence he had on molding Obama’s political career or when Obama became aware of the past of Ayers, or if their association has ever ended.

McCain failed to exemplify the importance of vouchers and better schools, not just more money for bigger Government run programs. McCain failed to deliver on the importance of having individual choice in healthcare, and how a system based on the Canadian or British models is a system doomed to failure. McCain failed to mention that there has never been a Government Agency or Department that has run efficiently or effectively in the last 40 years, at least.

McCain failed to mention that many of the economic proposals made by Senator Obama are similar to another President besides Herbert Hoover. That President was Jimmy Carter, and the result was double digit inflation, double digit unemployment, and an overall malaise for the nation.

So in the end, the debate was a draw. Neither candidate shone more brightly than the other. Both were able to provide solid arguments for their proposals and views, and point out problems with their opponents position.

But Senator Obama was clearly the better debater. Of course this is not some school competition, there is no blue ribbon award for parsing huge subjects into the equivalent of a soundbite. The next president cannot be elected because of their composure in a debate, or the speed in which they respond to a question with bullet points of their stump speeches.

Polispeak may win elections, and look great on the television. But it does not prove the worthiness of a Presidential candidate. Nor does catchy phrases like “Senator Government” – even if it was an accidental blurb.

I have long ago declared that I am a supporter of Senator McCain. M V Consulting, Inc. has endorsed McCain for President. Evenso I can see and admit that Senator Obama does have some ideas of interest, surrounded and encompassed in a Government that spends far more than it can collect in taxes, is involved in more aspects of individual lives, and controlling the choices we are able to make. That is his national healthcare, federal education, higher corporate capital gains and individual taxes, unfettered abortion, and hand picked energy alternatives really means – Big Government to a degree unseen previously.

You may not agree with that conclusion. You may vote for Senator Obama. That is your right and I respect and admire that, even while I can disagree with your choice. But the debates have made one thing clear to me, we all need to vote because if we do not America may suffer as a result. And in making that choice of who to vote for you should review the records, votes, and campaign promises of each candidate.

Because in the end, 2 years from now, you can look backwards and/or place blame but you can’t undo your vote.

Labels: Bill Ayers, Polispeak, political debate, Presidential election race 2008, Senator Barack Obama, Senator John McCain, tax policy

Wow, the words are flying now. The Presidential race has taken a step to overdrive as both the candidates attack each others past. And the points picked by the McCain campaign seem to have the Obama campaign flustered to say the least.

The Obama campaign has been targeting the investigation of McCain in relation to the Keating Five investigations. Senator McCain was vindicated in that investigation and found to be without blame. Yet this was a huge problem at the time, and may again be, as the economy flounders in the wake of the mortgage bailout and the credit crunch.

With all eyes on the Dow Jones Index, which had dropped as low as 781 points down in the day. Expectations that all the problems of the mortgage crisis were averted by the $700 billion bailout have been proven false, which really should be no surprise. Europe and other world markets are now facing their own problems which again rippled from the initial failure of the Fed, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd on their Congressional banking committees, and President Bush. Note that neither Senator Obama nor Senator McCain were responsible for this economic fiasco. But with the introduction of the Keating Five Obama is trying to paint McCain as fiscally irresponsible.

Of course if the record is to be looked at only McCain has tried to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and highlight problems while Democrats denied the existence of a problem. And only McCain actively worked on improving the bailout plan from what was essentially a blank check to an unwatched Treasury Secretary, with repayment going to Democratic pet projects of dubious nature (ACORN) instead of the public.

The McCain camp has targeted the highly questionable association of William Ayers and Senator Obama. I admit that I have trouble with the close association of the potential next President with a known, and self-admited, terrorist that actively was involved with the bombing of Government buildings on American soil and remains unrepentant. And it is accurate that Senator Obama has initially described their association as a friend, and has backed away from that since the early Primaries while the major news media has avoided all discussion of the matter.

The McCain camp has also targeted the association of Obama with Tony Rezco and Rev. Wright. I disagree with these associations being used against Obama as much as I disagree with The Keating Five tactic. Obama has never been found to have been influenced by either man in this voting record since he engaged in politics in Illinios. Without a reason to be alarmed, their less than perfect public images are just mud to be thrown at the candidate. And I have discussed my thoughts about the attacks using Rev. Wright, which I feel are a sidestep to a racial attack, in depth during the Primaries when Senator Clinton first used the tactic.

But the fact is that neither of these items being used by each camp address the fact that the economy will be weaker and troubled during at least the first year of the next President’s term. It is unrealistic that further cuts to taxes will be immediately available to stimulate the economy. It is equally unrealistic that adding 800 billion in new spending will be possible.

Right now Senator Obama is talking about taking on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s dream of a second stimulus plan. Considering the over $1 trillion spent this year just on failing banks and finance companies I can’t imagine where this money would come from, or how it would be any more effective than the first stimulus plan. Infact it would be less effective considering the economic landscape.

As for McCain he continues to believe that lowering corporate taxes is the only solution, which I believe will be a hard sell.

The fact is that right now the drop in the Dow Jones Index, and the up coming horrendous 4th quarter earnings that will reflect the slowdown in the economy, are helping Senator Obama and Democrats. There is no logical reason for this, since both Parties were equally lax and culpable in the creation of this problem (though arguably Democrats are slightly more at fault especially if the past is considered). But if the economy continues to falter drastically, and the promise of a 2nd stimulus plan gains attention (as it likely will) the chance of Obama winning the election increased dramatically.

And if that is what happens, for the reason of the economy, the real pain will start. In my opinion the weakest plan, and the least fiscally flexible plan, is held by Obama. With him in office, and a Democratic Congress again, I expect new record low approval ratings, double digit inflation, double digit unemployment, and an increase in taxes of all Americans by 7 – 15% minimally. Essentially a return to the environment that President Carter created.

But we will see if I am correct and if the various mudslinging attempts of the campaigns have any backlash.

Labels: Bill Ayers, Dow Jones Index, mortgage crisis, Nancy Pelosi, President Carter, Presidential election race 2008, Rev. Wright, Senator Barack Obama, Senator John McCain

The following is the full interview between Bill O’Reilly and Senator Obama as first seen on the O’Reilly Factor. For commentary on each part of the interview please check out Black Entertainment USA

Part 1 Iraq



Part 2 The Economy



Part 3 Bill Ayers, Rev. Wright



Part 4 Alternative Energy and Domestic Drilling

Labels: alternative energy, American economy, Bill Ayers, Bill O'Reilly, domestic drilling, Iraq, O'Reilly Factor, Presidential election race 2008, Rev. Wright, Senator Obama