What A Difference A Day (and an Internal Poll or Two) Makes

June 12, 2011

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (how I love that phrase!) last week:

“Nancy Pelosi has declined to join fellow Democrats in demanding Rep. Anthony Weiner’s resignation, according to the Associated Press. The House Democratic leader and former speaker said that the decision of whether he resigns should be left up to Weiner and his constituents.”

Former Speaker Pelosi this week:

“Congressman Weiner has the love of his family, the confidence of his constituents, and the recognition that he needs help,” Pelosi (D-San Francisco) said in a statement. “I urge Congressman Weiner to seek that help without the pressures of being a member of Congress.”

Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz last week:

“I think this is a personal matter and that’s how it should be left.”

(In fact, Debbie was so adamant about Weiner’s Twitter behavior being a personal matter that that’s pretty much all she would say on the subject to CNN’s Wolf I Lost On Jeopardy Blitzer. She sounded like a broken record.)

DNC Chair Wasserman Schultz this week:

“This sordid affair has become an unacceptable distraction for Rep. Weiner, his family, his constituents and the House — and for the good of all, he should step aside and address those things that should be most important — his and his family’s well-being,”

Poor Weiner. With friends like that, who needs enemies?

Stoutcat


How Do We Choose What To Write About Now?

August 17, 2010

You may have noticed that we have only two posts during the past week. Worse, this is after a two-week hiatus. You may be asking yourselves, “Why so little content when so much is happening?” That’s just the point. Where to begin?

If you think it’s easy choosing a topic to write about here at Grand Rants, think again. No, seriously. We have to think again and again ourselves. And it’s only getting more difficult because of the sheer volume of potential rants that occur every day.

Since the inception of “GR” two years ago, the intention of the writers has been to focus on our motto of “Our World Discussed.”  By that, we meant current events, politics, social issues, society in general etc.

Hard work has borne fruit as Grand Rants’ readership quickly exceeded our expectations.  And we’ve been proud of that, even if some of our work would have been better left on the editing room floor.

But as the weeks and months unfolded,  our focus gradually morphed into mostly following the exploits (and exploitation) of the Obama administration as their actions pretty much took over current events, politics, social issues, society in general etc. Acorn. Van Jones. Czar after Czar, avoiding any possible vetting by Congressional approval process. Stimulus packages.  Never in the history of this country has one administration done so much to so many, so quickly as to “fundamentally change” America.

But not for the better.

And it’s not just the Obama administration. It’s our society as well. We seem to have arrived on the corner of Chaos Street and Anarchy Drive because  not only do we suffer from a dearth of quality leaders in the politico who “lead (positively) by (good) example”  but, as a society, we seem to have lost our moral compass. As for our leaders, all they give us are examples of how to rid yourself of any shame for any wrongdoing. Congress (and not just the Democrats) has become Gordon Gecko on steroids. And make no mistake: The American public have been good students.

So then: What DO we write about now? The list is so long… But then, like clockwork, just when I think I”ll have to spend half the day trying to determine which topic is the most urgent, good ol’ Barry Sotero (aka POTUS) says or does something to negate my need to prioritize.

We have a POTUS who has done his best to be all things to all people on both sides of the fence. Apparently, he didn’t get the memo that stated you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.

This was most vividly illustrated over the last few days beginning with a White House dinner, celebrating the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. 

In his speech at that dinner, he defended the rights of Muslims to build a mosque within several blocks of Ground Zero in lower Manhattan. By all measures, using carefully worded phrases and emphasis, it appeared he was giving the building of the mosque his blessing, scoring points for himself amongst the Muslims gathered to feast in the White House.

But he followed this a day later by insisting he wasn’t endorsing the project at all. Just the right to build it. The target audience hearing the back-spin was of course, NOT the Muslims who had attended the dinner the night before, but an outraged America.

All things to all people. 

And the President has the chutzpah to think he can still pull it off – or, perhaps, the ego to simply not care.

Mr. President:  You’ve already had you shot at fooling most of the people some of the time: You got elected President.  But you’re not fooling anyone anymore with the exception of those who want to be fooled,  and those too gullible to know the difference.

Perhaps the bigger issue for Obama is how this is unraveling the Democratic Party. On Monday a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader (and tourist sniffing hound) Harry Reid broke ranks with the White House saying the Senator thinks the Mosque should be built elsewhere.

It’s all ’bout them polls, isn’t, Harry?  As the mid-term elections grow closer, look for more Democrats to abandon the Obama Express in favor of saving their own careers.

Rumor has it that Nancy Pelosi is even looking for a new word and it doesn’t rhyme with Obama.

I hope people will see through these self-serving gestures and simply look at the voting records of each of these self-serving turncoats. There, you will find the truth: They HAVE supported virtually every step Obama has taken. And they are largely responsible for the state of the country being where we are today.

The best we can do is remember our values, and hold on to them. And I hope each of you will “remember in November” just who put us where we are.

In the meantime, what would YOU like to see in Grand Rants? More political coverage? Less? More coverage on other day-to-day issues and human interest? 

See? It’s not so easy to narrow down that list, now, is it?

Let us know…

Gerry Ashley


Remember In November – Billboard #2

July 18, 2010

Here’s number 2 in our series of suggested Billboards to help people “Remember In November.”

Click to view full size. You are free to download and circulate as you like.

If you missed our first billboard, you can see it by clicking here.

I would only point out that, although the Billboard is a display of satire, please don’t become complacent regarding the significance of this mid-term election. It’s one of the most important and decisive elections this country has ever faced: America is under attack from within. We’ve seen the evidence mounting:

  • After only days in office, President Obama and the Democratic Congress (backed by a few traitor Repubicrats) teamed up to ram through Congress and sign a stimulus package we were told had to be done immediately in order to cap unemployment at 8.5%. The bill was never posted for the 5 days Obama assured the American public (during the Presidential Campaign) on the Internet for us to read before he signed it. To date, unemployment has gone as high as 10% (much higher in areas of the country) and currently sits at about 9.5%. It was recently reported that only about 1/3 of the money has been spent, yet the lame duck congress (after the election and before the new congressmen take their seats in January 2011) is expected to pass yet another stimulus package. Many think Obama is using this money as a slush fund to buy support from legislators.
  • Barack Obama and Congress teamed up to shove health care reform down our throats, against the will of the majority of Americans. In doing so, the government has taken control of over 1/6th of our economy in one fell swoop. Implementation begins with new steep taxes in 2011, but actual benefits will not be provided to the masses until 2019.
  • In a stunnng accusation,  former Department of Justice employee J. Christian Adams details how the Department of Justice (under Obama appointee, Eric Holder) is racially biased against whites claiming that Holder was told by officials in the Obama administration to back off prosecutions of blacks who commit crimes against whites, but aggressively prosecute cases where white(s) allegedly have committed crimes against blacks. A black elected official in Noxubee agreed, during a deposition,  that racially discriminatory behavior against whites occurred. “But you got to understand,” he explained, “now it’s payback time.

No, what we need to understand is that we have a chance in November to START turning America’s ship back to a democracy. But we can only do it if everyone legally eligible to vote exercises that right.

Gerry Ashley


Financial Reform: The Good, The Bad and The Butt-Ugly.

July 16, 2010

You probably heard that the Financial Reform Bill just passed the Senate and is on it’s way to being signed into law by Emp-error Obama, probably some time next week.

“Yes,” you ask, gritting your teeth. “But how, exactly, does it affect me?”

Well, just the fact that it was written by Democratic Senator Chris Dodd, and Massachusetts Representative Barney Frank should have you running, screaming towards the Canadian border.  I find the irony rather horrific: one of the chief proponents of Fannie-Mae and Freddie-Mac (the two programs that are chiefly responsible for the economic mess we’re in regards to banking) is one of the architects of the legislation to get us OUT of the trouble he caused. Think about that: If you had to trade your car in because the mechanic at your dealer ruined your engine, would you turn to that same mechanic to write the service manual for your new car?

As to the impact, in some minor areas, we gain, but as is always the case when government gets involved, it’s gonna cost you at the other end… Translation: Break out the KY Jelly, folks. Try to minimize the pain.

The legislation took well over a year to develop, and it wound up taking slightly over 2,300 pages to contain it. But NOT TO WORRY!  I’m sure His Sly-ness, the Omnipotent Lord Obama will give us 72 hours to look at it on-line before signing it into law, just like he did with the stimul… uh, woops. Never mind… “Nothing to see here, folks. Just keep moving, please.”

Better yet: If you are into Masochism, download it yourself here and enjoy your week-end: The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (as a public service announcement, I recommend using a condom while reading it).

If I may, here’s a highly condensed version of some of what you’ll find buried in this legislation:

1.) The legislation creates an agency that can seize and liquidate any bank (including those considered “too big to fail”).

The Good News: We shouldn’t get stuck paying to bail out banks for their failures as George Bush had us do.
The Bad News: It does NOT, however, control just how big a bank can grow. Recipe for disaster? Guess we’ll have to wait to find out. You know, like Nancy Pelosi’s take on health care: “We have to pass it to find out what’s in it!”
The REALLY Bad News: Hello? The government now has permission to seize any bank (and its assets) at any time, based on the whim of… the government. Translation: More power taken away from the people and given to the government (who wrote this legislation again? Hugo Chavez?)

2.) A new federal agency (under the banner of the Federal Reserve) that will impose more regulatory control over credit card companies, payday advance companies and mortgage companies.

The Good News: Perhaps more restrictions on the types and amounts of fees they can gouge customers with. Pre-payment penalties will likely be eliminated or greatly reduced on certain types of loans and mortgages.

The Bad News: Those fees are where these institutions make much of their profit. While the government presents these regulations as “consumer protection, ” that translates into “less profit” for these entities which, ultimately, means more restrictions on their service to you. Look for new fees on other services to make up the difference, harder to obtain credit cards, harder to qualify for mortgages and more restrictions on availability of payday advances…  Yeah, that ought to help the economy recover. If you’re in the construction industry, plan on selling a lot fewer houses. A LOT fewer.

The REALLY Bad News: With new regulations on mortgage companies, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize mortgage money will be much harder to qualify for. With a plethora of unsold homes in foreclosure already flooding the market, that could keep the housing market depressed for years.  Couple this with an economy that’s already on life-support and a job market that is – well, for lack of a better term – flat-lining, in most parts of the country, and we could actually see a society where we could have millions of homeless people living on the streets and hundreds of thousands of empty homes sitting in foreclosure. If and when that happens, how long before the government will write (and pass) legislation allowing the government to seize homes that are sitting empty and redistribute the right to live there.

Who would have thought the pompous idiots  who helped the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac debacle trash our economy could come up with something even more foreboding for the future? Way to go Barney and Chris! Would you like to inject us directly with poison next?

3.) The new legislation requires more transparency in the derivatives market.

The Good News: None we can actually measure. Not until the “bad” news is resolved (which the government has absolutely no incentive to do)..

The Bad News: Fill in your own sarcastic comment here about “transparency,” especially if it’s going to work the same way it has with the Obama administration.  And it probably will, because they have apparently left it up to Bill Clinton to ask for the definition of “transparency.”


4.) New limits on how much Banks  can charge retail businesses when customers use debit cards for purchases and how much they can charge for overdrafts.

The Good News: If you’re a business owner, this means less cost to you when a customer swipes a debit card to make a purchase. So this means the businesses will pass those savings on to us, right?  Nope. Not necessarily.  Nothing requires businesses to do so.

For those of us who live paycheck to paycheck and occasionally overdraft our account, banks will be forced to reduce the penalty for doing so, meaning they would be limited to how much they can gouge you when they (as comedian Gallagher would say), “charge you more of what they already know you don’t have any of.”

The Bad News: Under the old laws, businesses were required to allow you to use your debit card for ALL purchases, no matter how small. Under the Financial Reform legislation, that restriction is lifted. Look for retailers to jump on the bandwagon of having minimum amounts for purchases using debit cards. You may have to forget about buying that McDouble using the debit card. The consumer’s new credo: “Cash: Don’t leave home without it.” Look for armed robberies to increase as a result.

Even MORE Bad News: With banks making less money per transaction with retailers, reduced fees for overdrafts and other fees, look for them to make it up elsewhere. This could mean buh-bye to that free-checking or, perhaps, more or higher fees for using that debit card to obtain cash at the ATM. Where banks are concerned, you may want to keep that KY Jelly handy. If they can’t screw you one way, they’ll screw you another. And, from what I’ve seen, this 2,319 page legislation isn’t going to do a thing to end that.

Here’s a couple of videos that show various aspects of the legislation:
A) The Good

B) The Bad

C) The Ugly: A Paul Shanklin tribute to the man who helped create the banking debacle, and then in true “End of days” fashion, has co-authored the legislation that’s supposed to resolve the very problem he helped create.

Enjoy your week-end, folks. Good news: Stoutcat returns from vacation next week.

H/T Michelle Malkin

Gerry Ashley


Remember In November: Take 1

July 10, 2010

In my previous post, I featured a billboard that someone with a keen sense of satire in Marshall, Texas put up, skewering “Ayatollah Barack Obama.”

After posting, I thought to myself, “What a great way to get the truth out before the mid-term elections. The President hasn’t yet signed an executive order to ban political billboards. And it doesn’t even have to be sponsored by an opposing candidate. It could just as easily be done by the general public, sick and tired of the current Congress rubber-stamping  the Obama administration’s efforts to “Fundamentally Change America” as we have known (and loved) it. 

The November mid-term elections are just over 3 months away. Now is the time for all good political pundits to come to the aid of their country.

Toward that end, I’m going to do my part and come up with some billboard designs. If anyone would like to “steal” my idea and implement it, please do so with my blessings. Seriously. There is no copyright on my ideas. If you can improve upon it,  so much the better. You get the idea. And if this inspires someone to come up with even better one as well, these will have served my purpose.

Feel free to forward these to your friends to get the message(s) out. We need to build the “resistance” as large as possible and that can only be done by getting the word out: It’s NOW (November) or, quite possibly, NEVER.

That said, here’s my first installment of my “Remember In November” billboard campaign suggestions.  Click on the image to see it full-size.

Gerry Ashley


Cuckoo’s Nest

July 2, 2010


The Speaker of the House, third in line for the presidency, is a crackpot. A fruitcake. Her chickens are scattered. She’s a few puppies short of a pet shop. There’s simply no other way to spin a diatribe as idiotic as this:

“This is one of the biggest stimuluses [sic] to our economy. Economists will tell you this money is spent quickly, it injects demand into the economy, and is job creating. It creates jobs faster than most any other initiative you can name, because, again, it is money that is needed for families to survive, and it is spent. So it has a double benefit; it helps those who have lost their jobs but it also is a job creator, and for that reason, for those two reasons at least, it should be passed, and I’m optimistic that it will. It’s impossible to think of a situation where we would have a country that would say we’re not going to have unemployment benefits, and the only people who want them are people who don’t want jobs. That’s just so contrary to what our country is about. And I reject that misrepresentation of the motivation for people to be on unemployment insurance.”

Or as she might have put it in Twitter format:  @Pelosi  Unemployment ins creates jobs & allows ppl to spend $$. Un-american repubs say only lazy ppl want unempl ins. BAD REPUBS!

Of course, this is the same crazy lady who said last year:

“Every month that we do not have an economic recovery package 500 million Americans lose their jobs. I don’t think we can go fast enough to stop that.”

Doug Powers, guest-blogging for Michelle Malkin, agrees with me, and takes it one step further:

In the real world, demonstrating lunacy of this magnitude is known as a “cry for help” and an intervention involving large nets, straight-jackets and electric shock therapy is in order. But not in Washington, DC, where free-range crazies are allowed to pick pockets, loot futures, and all too often get re-elected.

Of course, if this were the movies, Pelosi would end up with a lobotomy, Harry Reid would have to come in and smother her, and then he’d break a window and go running out into the Nevada desert…

I can dream, can’t I?

Stoutcat


Time To Add “Recall” Provision To Constitution!

May 17, 2010

“Where’s Your Shame? You’ve left us up to our necks in it…”
                                                “Changes” as sung by David Bowie

It’s a process normally found in Parliamentary governments such as England, Canada or Australia. But given the actions of the Obama administration over the past year and a half (as well as some of the decisions made in previous administrations), one could make a good argument that it’s time we modify our Constitution to add a Recall provision or “Vote of No Confidence.”

Sure, our democracy has the rules of impeachment. But, as we’ve seen, a sitting President can take sexual liberties with a female intern young enough to be his daughter and still walk away holding onto his Presidency simply by smiling and winking at the cameras as he says, “Ah did not have sexual relations with that woman…”

Another sitting President surrounds himself with radicals – including some who are self-avowed communists – for the sole purpose of “fundamentally changing America.”

In the past, when we have elected politicians only to discover some of their biggest campaign promises were lies (surprise, surprise!), it meant an elongated period of war (Nixon’s 1968 campaign promise that he had a plan to end the war within 6 months), new and higher taxes (Bush 41’s “Read My Lips” pledge), or any number of promises of job creations and/or economic upturns.

But when Barack Obama began his Presidential campaign (which is now seemingly in it’s 4th year – and continuing), he promised “Hope and Change”… just the words an America weary with war in the middle-east wanted to hear. 

Obama’s finely tuned campaign sailed through the campaign waters creating a wake the Republicans couldn’t respond to and robbing their sails of enough wind to prevent them from mounting much of a response.

As a result, a majority of Americans, who had sub-contracted thought, reason and any vetting of political candidates to the mainstream media saw and heard only the Obama spin from the likes of commentators who stumbled all over their own metaphors in an attempt to anoint “The One.” In short, it was nothing less than the biggest packaging and selling of media hype since four young men named John, Paul, George and Ringo landed on our shores in 1964. As Limbaugh would say, “For those of you in Rio Linda, that would be The Beatles…”

So like Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton, and Bush 43, what’s the worst that could happen under Obama? Wait 4 years and if he turns out to be a loser, we can vote him out, right? Uh…

 Let’s review just some of the damage Obama has managed to accomplish over the past 18 months:

  • The biggest pork-filled bill voted on by a Democratic Congress and quickly signed by the President without the promised “72 hours for the American People to review it.”  It has since been discovered that much of that funding was earmarked for special interest projects and very little of it has actually had any positive impact on the economy… but added nearly a trillion dollars to our debt.
  • Obama has increased our nation’s deficit many times more than the size of the one passed on to him by the previous administration… 
  • While spending non-existent government funds at the fastest rate of any President in history (with the least amount to show for it) Obama has done so while blaming the Bush administration for fiscal irresponsibility (and any other problem we’re facing).
  • Nationalized auto makers with principal ownership going to the government and the unions, totally screwing stockholders in the process.
  • Nationalized banks 
  • An unsustainable Healthcare Reform system that the CBO is only now coming forward with the real costs (over $1 Trillion) which will, if fully enacted, probably bankrupt the United States, throwing us into a Greece-like scenario of strikes and riots (if we can hold out that long from his other spending).
  • Thoroughly embarrassed us around the world, sucking up to people like Hugo Chavez (who openly mocks Obama) and alternating between kissing the ass of Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and criticizing him.
  • Grabbing White House control of the US Census in a failed attempt to allow ACORN to handle the resulting redistricting of representation. Only ACORN’s self-destruction from corruption prevented the plan from moving forward (but who knows WHO is handling this now?)
  • A long list of Czars (over 30 of them) who have been empowered by Obama although only 6 of them went through any Congressional approval process. These include “Czars” who will be deciding what kind of pay we should receive for our jobs, how much energy we will be allowed to have (IF we can still afford to have it), WHAT we can eat, what kind of sexual educational materials our children will be exposed to in school… for a complete list of them and what they do, click here
  • Coming soon… A Value Added Tax (VAT) similar to what European countries use in lieu of an income tax. One difference here in America: It will be IN ADDITION to our Federal, State and local taxes. Still believe Obama won’t tax the middle class, folks? Oh, and then there’s a little thing coming up called
  • CAP AND TRADE. Definition: TAXES on energy use by ANYONE using energy. That would cover just about all of us, wouldn’t it?

And, I wouldn’t limit the recall vote to just the Presidency.  Here’s a few others I think deserve to be recalled:

  • Nancy Pelosi  (Speaker of the House) – “We’re going to pass healthcare whether they like it or not.” Oh, and “We’ve got to pass healthcare to see what’s in it.”
  • Harry Reid (Senate Majority Leader) is there any explanation really needed here? Shouldn’t we be able to fix it so he doesn’t have to “smell the tourists” any more?
  • Barney Frank – “”These two entities—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—are not facing any kind of financial crisis.”

The point is, why should we have to wait to see how much more damage these arrogant and incompetent individuals can do in their full terms?

It’s time that a RECALL provision and Vote of No Confidence be added to our Constitution. One problem: Guess who we would have to turn to in order to get it implemented?

Oh, goody.

Gerry Ashley


The Abject Failure of the Obama Presidency – Part 6

April 14, 2010

“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy; it’s inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”   Winston Churchill 

To understand the above quote from Sir Winston Churchill is to understand how Barack Obama rose to power without actually having accomplished anything of substance beyond the spoken word. It also explains why his Presidency is doomed to failure. Indeed, his very political philosophy (and, to a similar extent, the entire philosophy of far left-wing democrats) is the antithesis of tenet #6 in the series of tenets by William J. H. Boetcker, defining democracy and how to perpetuate it:    

#6. “You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.”  

No small man’s lot in life has ever been improved by tearing down someone of greater success without serious cost to both. All that has ever been accomplished by doing so is to serve the envy of the lesser man at the cost of punishing that man who has worked hard to accomplish his success. It also destroys the incentive of both men. 

Envy is a powerful political narcotic, one that has been used throughout history by political opportunists like Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, Mao Tse Tung, Karl Marx … and Barack Hussein Obama. Any society that has a lower class is ripe for socialist attempts to “level the playing field” through the application of Karl Marx’s “Critique of the Gotha Program” where he espouses, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” This is the vision of Barack Obama, exposed when he told Joe the Plumber how “spreading the wealth around is a good thing.” 

Indeed, it often appears that Obama gets his marching orders from that “Critique.” He’s used the “Spread the wealth around” promise in his campaign as a lure to attract votes among the poorer communities. His message, however, only spotlights the part where the riches should be taken away from the “haves” and redistributed amongst the “have nots.” 

In the two years of campaigning for the Presidency, and now going on a year and a half as President, I have neither seen, read, nor heard of one speech or any action taken by Barack Obama stressing the responsibility of the have-nots who are capable of doing so to lift themselves by their bootstraps (as many of their neighbors have done). There has been no focus on becoming contributors to the common pool of wealth to be distributed, merely promises to take from the “haves” — obfuscation and pandering to the masses, especially those who have made entitlements their way of life.  

Bill Gates

What has always set America apart from other nations has been that form of government which gives opportunity to anyone willing to put in the effort. Not happy with what your lot in life? Your only limitation in America is your willingness to roll up your sleeves.

How else does a college drop out like Bill Gates go on to become one of the richest people in America, founding a company (Microsoft) that changed the way the entire world thinks about (and utilizes) computers?  How does someone from the poor neighborhoods of Philadelphia go from his humble beginnings to become one of the nation’s most beloved entertainers? Ask Bill Cosby and he’ll tell you: A good, solid work ethic and commitment to your dream.

 But that’s only part of what the two Bills have accomplished.  While they both enjoy lives of luxury and privilege, both are philanthropists who give back to the community that gave them opportunity to achieve. Not because it was legislated, not because they had to; but because that’s what Americans do. And there are countless thousands whose lives are better now, having benefitted from the generosity of those two who have shared their success so that others might achieve through their own efforts.

Unlike entitlement programs, the kinds of assistance provided by philanthropists like Gates and Cosby usually requires a measure of effort on the part of the beneficiary. The same cannot be said for the Obama message of simply spreading the wealth of others around. It’s as simple as the age-old metaphor from Lao Tzu, (the founder of taoism): “Give a man a fish, feed him for a day;  teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime.” Obama, doesn’t wish to teach anyone  how to fish. He merely wants to punish the successful fisherman by giving away his catch.

Entitlements may calm the hunger of the belly, but it’s that hunger for more in life that drives the incentive to succeed. Take away that hunger by entitlement without responsibility and you end up with an ever-growing segment of the population with an entitlement mind-set, demanding their share in return for simply existing. In the end, socialism yields to that demand, but it strips away incentive from both ends of the social spectrum.

Ultimately, under Obama’s vision, there would be no incentive to strive for excellence if you know the government will seize the fruits of your labor.  Eventually, there will be fewer and fewer to take from which means less to give to those demanding. Or, as former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher said, so eloquently,

“The problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.”

  Gerry Ashley


The Abject Failure Of The Obama Presidency – Part 5

April 12, 2010

 

“If you want to test a man’s character, give him adversity. If you want to test his integrity, give him power.” Gerry Ashley

 Tenet #5: You cannot build character and courage by taking away man’s initiative and independence.  

 I know it might seem presumptuous to quote myself at the top of this piece, but that has been a long-standing tenet of my own and one I feel fits perfectly here. I coined that expression in 1978, after having spent some time in what was then the Soviet Union. I had been teaching computer technology classes to Russian scientists at The Institute for High Energy Physics  (outside of Moscow). Ironically, it was a quote from an interview I gave (upon my return) in praise of the Russian people I had met during my time spent there… and as an indictment of their political leaders.

I’m dumbfounded to find its level of applicability in America some 32 years later.

For those too young to remember, let me clarify that “Soviet Union” actually referred to a combination of countries known collectively as the “United Soviet Socialist Republic” (USSR). Please note the third word in that title. Although communist in nature, the countries operated under a socialist structure. The socialist structure stripped away any incentive for the individual to strive for excellence.   

Case in point: I had dinner with an architect while there. He explained to me that he had made the exact same salary for 20 years, regardless of the quality of his work. Not long before our meeting, a young man who had just graduated from university and gone to work with my friend, sitting at the next desk. He had a starting salary which was the same as that of my friend with 20 years’ experience.

Imagine the feeling my friend had, knowing that this young man straight from University was starting at the same level he was at after 20 years of service. Now imagine how much initiative the young man might have, sitting next to my friend and knowing that, no matter how good a job he does, in 20 years, he would be making no more money than he’s already making.  

That’s how it goes in a socialist state: The government defines the value of the position, no matter the level of experience… or the quality of the job performed.  By the way: The quality of their goods reflected the lack of incentive to strive for excellence. The only time the Soviet government strove for (and demanded) excellence was when the product was one which would be viewed by the West and would bring shame upon the Soviet system if it were substandard. Hence the amount of effort that went in to export products like vodka and caviar; hence the intense attention to (and support of) athletes who would be competing against other countries (such as the Olympic Games).

Get ready for that, America. That’s what Barack Obama’s vision is for us: The same level of quality of life the Soviets had 30 years go. And back then, the Soviet standard was about 40 years behind America’s. Do the math and it’s easy to see that the standard of living Obama wants to take America to is where we were 70 years ago.  Is that a goal we should have for our children? Our grandchildren? Ourselves

One wonders if Obama will place a similar level of importance on the quality of workmanship applied to our exports and international athletes. Perhaps the answer will be based on whether or not he feels he’s apologized enough for America’s past greatness.

One thing is certain: If what I refer to as Obamunism takes hold in America, he won’t have to worry about apologizing for America’s greatness any longer.  

Sadder still, that may be his goal.

Gerry Ashley


Whose Revolution Is It, Anyway?

March 26, 2010

You say you want a revolution, well, you know…
We all want to change the world.

If you’re having a hard time making heads or tails out of what’s going on in this country, you’re in good company. The basic issue is that Barack Obama has turned things completely upside down. Allow me to explain:

What IS A Revolution?

The dictionary defines revolution as “an overthrow or repudiation and the thorough replacement of an established government or political system by the people governed.’ (emphasis mine)

There’s a revolution going on before our eyes. But it’s the people IN the government that are running the revolution:

  • Barack Obama has nationalized numerous banks, plus two automobile manufacturers (and seized the stocks from stockholders, issuing them to the government and the auto workers’ union).
  • Congress has just grabbed control of the soon-to-die-a-horrible-death health care system that, until now, has been the envy of the world. They’ve done it with a horrendous health care reform bill that the clear majority of we, the governed, have made clear we do not want. With that singular takeover, the federal government has also captured about 1/6th of the nations economy. The government will now force people to buy health insurance or be fined. If we can’t or won’t pay the fine, the IRS can have our property seized or put us in prison. Hint: Take prison, and you’ll get… that’s right… FREE HEALTH CARE.
  • In the same bill, Congress has managed to give the federal government ownership of the entire student loan industry (which, when implemented, stands to put tens of thousands of people out of work).
  • Emboldened by this success, watch for Obama and Congress team up quickly to pass “Cap and Trade” which will give the government the right to tell you how much energy you are allowed to use in industry before having to pay fines in the form of “Carbon Credits” (purchased, conveniently, through Al Gore’s new business which should make him a billionaire).
  • Also look for Obama and Congress to team up on an amnesty program to make the illegal aliens citizens–in effect, buying their votes for the fall (or 2012 Presidential) elections.  The hope is that illegal aliens from Mexico (estimated anywhere from 12 million to 40 million depending on what sources you use) will all vote Democrat in their gratitude for being rewarded for coming here illegally.

You tell me that it’s evolution. well, you know…
We all wanna change the world.

That gasping, wheezing sound you hear is capitalism and the free-enterprise system as we know them, struggling and dying, followed in their throes by those who will be deemed expendable in a new age of healthcare reform where “government experts” and not your ability to buy your own health insurance will decide who should be given the chance to live. It is the very destruction of everything America has stood for over the past two-plus centuries

But when you talk about destruction
Don’t you know that you can count me OUT!

It’s Obama and the Democratic Run Amok Congress tearing down democracy; and it’s We The People trying to save it. Yet those of us dedicated to fighting this “fundamental changing of America” (as Obama refers to it) are labeled racists for wanting to preserve our freedom, the free-enterprise system, capitalism, democracy, and the Constitution.

So just who are the revolutionaries here? Obama and the Democratic Congress or “We The People?”

Perhaps John Lennon can answer that (are you listening Anita Dunn and Ron Bloom?):

But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain’t gonna make it with anyone anyhow…

Ironically, it’s the Obama regime and Congress that have decided to spurn the rules and ignore the Constitution to accomplish much of their damage. But we “racist revolutionaries” (in his supporters eyes) will be the ones to turn things around in the only way a revolution should be done in a democracy: via the ballot box this November.  

 It will be a long road back, but it will show the world that true democracy can overcome tyranny. And eventually, Barack Obama will take his rightful place in the dump heap of failed leaders who dedicated themselves to a failed ideology.  

Gerry Ashley
(If we stand united), don’t you know  it’s gonna be… all right!