(For those on this l list who don't know Bob: he was CFO of Oracle when it went public, also CFO of Syntex, and holds a Ph. D. in economics from Berkeley . Since 1987, he has been an angel investor and private VC. He is on the Board of Overseers at the Hoover Institution.)
________________________________
My 6 Month Evaluation of the Obama Presidency
In November 2008 I wrote out my evaluation of the Obama candidacy and what it might mean to America . I filed this away, but sent it to family members and a few close friends and associates just so I'd be accountable for my real time observations. It's now been 6 months since Obama's inauguration.
(In the business world, this is typically when a first job review would occur; so, I made a note to myself to revisit his performance on the 6-month anniversary.) Thus, I now commit to filing my mid-year evaluation of our new President. As well, I've put in the file (but not forwarded to anyone) a separate "background check" - the one the press should've done on the Obama candidacy prior to presenting him to the American public - in case this is ever of relevance as things unfold.
As concerned as I was by Obama's candidacy when I wrote out my November pre-election reservations, truth be known, I didn't much like McCain/Palin either. At the time, I still had hopes that Obama might "govern from the center." Six months into it, however, I can say that he's been considerably worse than my worst fears. Thus, I'm updating my evaluation - this time with the fervent hope that by the year-end I can be genuinely more optimistic.
I've concluded that not only was Barack Obama too inexperienced to be President, but he also appears to be incompetent as an executive, more-than-just-politician-level-dishonest and a bit of a narcissist
(if not a fascist).
He seems to have little understanding of American history, her dreams, or her tremendous potential for risk-taking, self-correction and innovation. He and Michelle have turned out to be quintessential Ivy League " Oppression Studies majors" with (carefully concealed) "attitudes."
Obama seems, above all, to be a Community Organizer with shakedown credentials and extraordinary speaking ability.
All of this should have been clear -- had we simply done serious background checks. The following 4 items, at least, should have been clear to voters:
1. His surrogate father figure was Frank Marshall Davis, an avowed Communist.
2. Barack served as a committed trainer for Community Activist and Marxist Saul Alinsky.
3. He sat for nearly 2 decades at the feet of Jeremiah Wright, an angry, anti-American "Black Liberation Theologist".
4. His first autobiography, Dreams from My Father, was almost certainly ghost-written by William Ayers, a Vietnam-era domestic terrorist. [This last assertion has now been supported by careful analysis of syntax, spelling and common errors].
If these unusual threads (standing alone) are discounted to the point of not being disqualifiers, those evaluating Barack Obama might have considered that he'd NEVER...
i) held a job in the private sector,
ii) managed a payroll,
iii) led a turnaround or
iv) held any sort of executive position.
But, none of this mattered in the fall of 2008. After 6 months, I'm left wondering if power brokers on the Far Left of American politics aren't pinching themselves at their success in creating a fictitious character the press ushered to market in a Bush-weary and "politically correct" America. In his second autobiography, The Audacity of Hope, Obama recognizes the advantage of his tabula rasa "creation" when he writes, "I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views."
And, project we did! Thus, the former Barry Soetoro of Honolulu , Jakarta , Mombasa , Occidental, Columbia , Harvard and the mean streets of Chicago moved at light speed from being the first-term senator nobody had ever heard of to President of the United States . In the process, despite numerous efforts, no one has yet seen his birth certificate, his college transcripts, his application to Occidental (likely as a "foreign student"?), or the passport he used to travel in 1981 to Pakistan with buddy Wahid Hamid (likely an Indonesian one?). For some reason, the Obama campaign has, so far, spent $3/4 million keeping these records out of public view. So, it's easy to wonder -- if they supported Obama's putative CV -- why not make them available and put to rest all suspicions about provenance, training and politics?
My growing hunch is that there's virtually no paper trail because the Obama biography has been created largely out of whole cloth. There -- I've said what increasing numbers of people must be thinking, but are afraid to voice. But, whether or not Obama is more than a cleverly-marketed fiction, and whatever one thinks of his history, one thing is clear. He finally does have a record to evaluate. And, it's not a confidence-inspiring one from my standpoint.
At best, Obama is an attractive symbol for America and a compelling communicator; but he's...
1. Not an executive. He's shown an utter inability to focus, to set priorities and to consider 2nd and 3rd order or long-term consequences to his actions. Lack of focus on priorities is fatal as a CEO; (but, maybe less so for a political leader?) (Can only speak eloquently with the aid of a teleprompter!)
2. Not a steward or fiduciary for America . Obama clearly does not see his primary job as one of overseeing the security and well-being of America during his tenure as its chief executive. He's not only unwilling to stand up for America , but he also regularly seems to go out of his way to apologize for her history. This makes it apparent that he believes his most important job is to change America into what he and Michelle thinks it should have been, had we not suffered the Founders' flawed vision.
At worst, Obama's aims seem truly radical; his methods pure Alinsky; and his success derivative of obfuscating the truth, creating crises, and rushing changes into law that no one can possibly absorb under artificial deadlines - all aimed at limiting private property rights, changing the Constitution and forever altering our free market system?
( Click here to read who Saul Alinsky was, what he taught, and compare to who Obama is and what he's doing!)
For those who consider Obama's training and background irrelevant, they can now evaluate him as a Commander-in-Chief and CEO from what he's done over his first 6 months.
Among many other things, these evidences have come in the form of:
1. A $787B "stimulus" package (sold as preventing a "crisis from becoming catastrophe")
2. The failure to focus on addressing the banking crisis as "Job One"
3. The migration of TARP funds to non-banking concerns, viz., auto industry
4. Announcing tax increases in the middle of a recession
5. Failure to identify projects to fund job creation (Thus, 10% of stimulus yet spent)
6. Announcing that there would be "no pork" or "earmarks" in the " stimulus" package in order to get it passed without review when there were nearly 10,000 buried in the unread bill (including a $9B high-speed rail line to Las Vegas for Harry Reid)
7. Bailouts of the banking and auto industries
8. The appointment of a 31-year-old to manage the recreation of the auto companies
9. The exalting of union claims above those of bondholders (violating a 200+ year history of contract law/property rights)
10. The appointment of 34 unvetted "czars" -- creating more than in the House of Romanov between 1762 and 1917!
11. The failure to appoint a Cabinet of tax-paying, competent Americans (reason for the move to the Czar system of administration?)
12. The appointment of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court despite an apparent lack of qualifications and judicial temperament.
13. The dark-of-night passage of "Cap and Trade" legislation.
(300-page-long addendum inserted at 3AM the morning of the vote in the House)
14. The high pressure tactics to rush through a budget-busting $1.6T takeover of healthcare.
15. Phony "townhall" meetings with a fake cross-section of Americans selling Obamacare on ABC.
16. "Lying" about budget deficits - projecting 4% GDP growth by year-end.
17. "Lying" about job losses - projecting that if Congress would just ram through the "stimulus" that job losses could be halted at 8% (currently on their way to 10% and rising).
18. "Lying" about the costs of nationalized healthcare - (just as in 1965 when politicians projected Medicare's cost in 1990 to be $3 billion, its actual cost turned out in 1990 to $98 billion - 30 times as much).
19. Pretending that new entitlement programs will provide lower costs, better care, no significant tax increases, more competition (as government joins the fray!?) and keeping current private options. Claiming "free" healthcare will make America more competitive is baffling. Everyone knows the above are lies; but no one seems ready to call them out.
20. Forcing the "stimulus" package on states to impinge on "States Rights".
21. Failing to support the freedom-loving citizens in Honduras and Iran (and instead, giving comfort to their dictators) to say nothing of his ineffectiveness with North Korea and anti-Israeli pronouncements.
22. Allocating $4B of "stimulus" funds to ACORN, the voter fraud thugs.
23. Seeking to push through Union Card Check, the so-called "Fairness Doctrine," and threats to take away 2nd amendment rights (see Eric Holder), etc.
24. Moving the heretofore non-partisan census into the Whitehouse under the direction of Rahm Emanuel.
Whatever one thinks of the results, the process of getting to them should bother all Americans. In the Obama (Mayor Daley?) style of governing, it's not clear that Congress - who can't possibly process thoughtfully the blizzard of legislation - really serves any useful purpose other than to provide Politburo-style cover. Not only does Congress no longer debate legislation, but Obama has effectively circumvented its oversight of the executive branch by his appointment of czars.
In contrast to the direction Obama is taking us all, the Economist recently pointed out that 53% of all of the jobs created in the U. S. were created in one state last year: Texas (the most free market of all State economies and the "last best hope" [ha!] for secession?).
Meanwhile, in California , -- as a perfect preview to "Obama's America " -- job losses are already well into double digits, the state faces a $25B budget deficit and is closing down services and considering bankruptcy. I cannot predict what will happen to Obama's popularity, as people wake up to the size and intractability of the deficits he's promoting, the unavailability of credit for small businesses, or the increased tax rates on energy and payrolls provoking a continuing loss of jobs as small businesses shed employees due to skyrocketing costs.
But, is bad economic news bad for Obama? Sadly, the answer, if one studies the Alinsky formula for bloodless revolution, is "Heck no!" Indeed, high unemployment is necessary for the Obama Redistribution Plan. According to Alinsky, only with high unemployment will people look to the government for help (and then become dependent), allowing government to gain control over the factors of productio ns. If one considers that the Alinsky manual might be Obama's "playbook," one can't help but want to evaluate how closely it's being followed.
Thus, in evaluating Obama's performance, it's probably worth noting (for the 6-month record) the key elements of the Alinsky formula. Written in 1971 by Chicago Organizer, Saul Alinsky, under the title of Rules for Radicals, this manual for effective change became Young Barack Obama's "bible." David Alinsky, son of the author said of our new President: "Barack Obama patterned himself after the Saul Alinsky model in everything he has done since arriving in South Chicago ."
Alinsky clearly stated its purpose: "Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution."
Note how closely Obama is following the rules for internal revolution, based on Alinsky's specific instructions:
1. Pursue an "Ideology of Change" (Alinsky's phrase for the most effective way to market revolution)
2. Target the banks that serve the steel, auto, and other industries.
3. Start class warfare -- Fuel the anger of what Alinsky calls the " Have-Nots," and the "Have-some-but-want-mores" against the "Haves."
4. Use crises to create fear.
5. Use pollution as a foil to grab power.
6. Set up "jobs programs" to make workers dependent on government.
7. Show supreme self-confidence.
8. Make communication skills your key weapon.
9. Use simple catch phrases and vague slogans ('Of the Common Welfare, [Nazi takeover of Germany], 'Bread and Peace,' [Bolshevik Revolution]) In this context, it's not hard to imagine that "Change" & "The Audacity of Hope" will one day be seen as the battle cry for the Obama revolution.
10. Use deception --"in war the end justifies almost any means."
11. Remain calm, appealing, likeable while inciting fear, conflict, defeat.
As these steps are being pursued, the press continues to refer to "the Republican recession," so Obama's popularity remains high. Any who saw tapes of President Bush warning Congress (on two separate occasions) that the market was headed for disaster unless it instituted the very reforms Barney Frank and Chris Dodd pooh-poohed, may be surprised to see the level of "cover " the press is providing this revolution.
As bleak as things look for free markets, I have hope. Why? Just as Bernie Madoff learned that ponzi schemes eventually come to light - Barack Obama may soon learn that "you can't fool all of the people all of the time."
It's unclear to me how much and how long America will have to pay for its experiment with Obamunism - his fantasy "green jobs," his new taxes, his junk science, his czars, his meddling in the auto and banking industries, his sure-to-be-disastrous Obamacare and the encouragement he's giving to union bosses, dictators and tyrants the globe over, to say nothing of his "Peace-through-Weakness" foreign policy. But, at some point, reality will take over, as it always does. I just hope America will have its Winston Churchill or Ronald Reagan ready to step into the breach when the time comes.
So far, the nervousness of Blue Dog Democrats and their ability to resist some of the wackier directives has been the only thing that has kept Obama from an outright failing grade, in my view. Perhaps, just as the Gingrich Congress rescued Bill Clinton, it may be these so-called Blue Dogs that rescue Obama. If not, it may be important for the survival of the union for government to be forever split between the parties!
Hopefully, this will get some of the liberals thinking, for a change. Trouble is, they may just applaud, kinda like Nero fiddled.
Come on 2010.
"He's got to take concrete steps to eliminate corruption," Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said last week. "That means you have to rid yourself of those who are corrupt. You have to actually arrest and prosecute them."
That opening quote was taken from a CBS news story by David Martin, and denied by the WH...the gist of the article...not the quote.
I was just wondering if that wouldn't apply to the White House and congress, as well as to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, the person Mullen was referring to in this little jewel of a quote.
In Martin's article, he said that HO had made up his mind what to do about troops for Afghanistan. He reportedly was going to give General McChrystal most of what he asked for. Although, not before the end of 2010.
Not so shouted the WH.
According to the WH National Security Advisor, James Jones:"Reports that President Obama has made a decision about Afghanistan are absolutely false. He has not received final options for his consideration, he has not reviewed those options with his national security team, and he has not made any decisions about resources. Any reports to the contrary are completely untrue and come from uninformed sources."
That sounds more like the HO we know, and definitely don't love. BTW, is Jones one of the pinko-commie community organizers HO appointed? I'll have to look that up. Judging from the tone, I'd say yes.
I see HO's about to take another trip. He's already traveled more than any previous president, and this trip he plans to restore the respect we've lost over the last several years...respect lost by Bush, of course. The Koreans got into a little skirmish, naval-wise. I wonder if that'll put a bit of a kink into his travel plans?
He should be able to smooth things over. Send him out on one of the North Korean boats. He'd feel more at home there than on one from the South.
Let's recycle some politicians.
Come on 2010.
As you know by now, witch P was able to get the HO version of healthScare through the congress over the weekend. There was a very interesting article in the WSJ, on page A18, which is where the following comes from:
"Mrs. Pelosi's craftiest political turn was a last-minute compromise to strip federal funds from insurance plans that cover abortions. The deal—negotiated by Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak and supported by the National Right to Life Committee—gave cover to 40-some Democrats to support the larger bill.
However, as subsidized costs soar, government will have no choice but to ration medical care, starting with the aged and grievously ill. Is pre-natal life more valuable than the elderly? We're reminded of the way pro-lifers supported Anthony Kennedy over Laurence Silberman for the Supreme Court in 1987 merely because Mr. Kennedy was a Catholic who claimed to personally oppose abortion. Mr. Stupak played the right-to-lifers like a Stradavarius.
The real importance of the abortion uproar is as preview of the politics that will dominate every medical coverage issue if ObamaCare becomes law. Every decision of what to insure or not—when an MRI can be used, or whether a stage-four breast cancer patient can get Avastin or some future expensive drug—will become subject to political intervention over moral disputes or budget constraints. Heretofore, these decisions have largely been made between a doctor and patient. This is the real "right to life" issue."
There is nothing that bitch, and obviously, most of the dems, plus one so-called republican from LA, wouldn't do to gain more control and power over our lives. And, if you think the final version of that bill will be passed in such a manner as to cut out funding for abortion, I have some swamp land here in GA you'd love.
Fact of the matter is, I wouldn't be surprised if it (abortion funding) were in the bill crammed through over the weekend. They could have changed one passage in one section, on one page, just to appease the 40 or so dems, while it still appeared in several other places in the 2000 page document...would not surprise me in the least. It's exactly what I'd expect.
The WSJ article went on to end thus: "Yet 39 other Democrats were given a pass on the vote, as the leadership knows how unpopular this bill is in most of America. They know this legislation is not the result of some national consensus in favor of expanding state power. Its passage was possible only because of temporary liberal majorities that are intent on fulfilling their dreams of a cradle-to-grave entitlement state. If they lose Blue Dog seats, or even their majority, in the short term, so be it. As the party of government, Democrats believe they will benefit in the long run from a much larger government.
Unless the Senate has an epiphany of common sense, Americans will be paying the bills for this willful exercise for generations to come."
I couldn't find the author of the article...it was apparently in the opinion section. Here's a link to the article. It's well worth a full read. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704402404574523613159447566.html
Can we impeach witch P and HO at the same time. Unfortunately, I haven't heard anything about impeachment since the dems called for Bush to be impeached. If there were EVER a reason to impeach, we have a whole damned house full now. This healthscare scam they're ramming down our throats could be called domestic terrorism, don't you think. Should qualify for impeachment.
Don't forget. The fight is just beginning, and the dems will be at it for years...they already have been.
Come on 2010.
Let's send the crooks home. We can't put 'em in jail.
One of my high school heroes was John Paul Jones. He reportedly said once, replying to a British call for surrender, that "I've only begun to fight," or something close to that.
That sums up the conservative position, regarding healthscare, cap and tax and just plain old saving the Union from the marxists, socialists, communists now in Washington, trying to destroy us.
Now, obviously, at least I hope it's obvious, I don't tend too much to political correctness. I have no problem dealing with this Major Horan who shot up Ft. Hood, killing and wounding all those people. He's one of those peace loving muslims...he's hung out with them and written in support of them. I have no problem standing him against a wall. Makes me think of General Black Jack Pershing. Don't have to wonder what he would do. I can think of a few more who could stand along with Horan.
Is there any doubt that HO, Pelosi, Frank, Reid, ALL the freaking czars HO's appointed, and don't forget his cabinet, want to destroy our once great country, and see it go the way of European socialism? Many Euros think we're making a big mistake.
I think they realize, that without a strong America, and that means United States, there may not even be a
socialist Europe. HO's already taken away Poland's missile defense, canceled the F-22, and doesn't have a clue about Afghanistan.
And his response to the shooting in Ft. Hood...what a joke. I thought Clinton was bad, but this SOB is making Clinton look great. His arrogance knows no bounds. He thinks the election last week was no reflection on him or his policies. They're pushing harder than ever on healthScare and cap and tax.
Please don't drop your guards. Keep calling and faxing your reps and senators. I know some of them are up for re-election, and they'll be the ones paying closer attention. Unfortunately, many, if not all, think we the people are clueless...they think we'll go along blindly with what ever they decree. I hope we can keep their feet to the fire.
11/03/09 was a good start. Let's keep working.
Remember the Alamo, Pearl Harbor, Vietnam, D-Day, Midway, Iwo...too many have given too much to give up now.
Come on 2010.
Let's clean house.
Was that a Wake Up Call across the bow of congress this past Tuesday? I certainly hope so.
If not, what will it take. Of course Rush was absolutely right in his predictions of how the drive-by media would spin any loss by the dems. It really was fun, watching them squirm and make excuses. But now, that date is behind us, and I've been busier than ever calling and faxing my senators and congressman.
I don't want them to think I'm sitting back and relaxing after the election. It looks like witch P is going to try to cram some sort of healthScare bill though this weekend. I've already warned my people how I feel once again, and in no uncertain terms. This PC crap has to go. That's a big reason we have so many killed and wounded at Ft. Hood.
From what I've seen and heard, they (the military) should have known about this major Horan. Apparently he was not shy about expressing his feelings and it sounds like the FBI looked at him back in the summer. If they had locked the SOB up, instead of promoting him, maybe this wouldn't have happened. Not
maybe. It
wouldn't have.
It's too bad the four rounds that found him didn't hit a more vital spot. It would have saved us a lot of time and money.
The next thing we'll be hearing is about how bad all these guns are. Specially, when you factor in the freak down in Orlando. Last I heard, they hadn't found the shooter. Maybe he'll have the decency to do himself in...or maybe the Orlando police will be better shots.
Round one down.
Come on 2010.
I, and probably you too, saw an AP headline calling Scozzafava a moderate Republican. The only thing moderate about her, may be her weight. Certainly isn't her politics. And how about the Republican party backing her?
And they wonder why they're in trouble. I recently received another request for money from the Republicans, along with a questionnaire to be filled in, which ostensibly gave them an idea of my leanings on various issues facing the country today. I'm sure you have probably seen the same questionnaire...or one similar.
Being the dutiful patriot that I am, I filled it in, along with side notes, and sent it back with my contribution. My contribution was the same as the last time I received a survey from them. $00.00. I did advise them that once they started acting like conservative Republicans again, ie smaller government, lower taxes, hands off our health care, strong support of our military, etc. I might start sending a few bucks their way--besides the taxes they already get.
BTW, I wonder how the party and the individuals like Gingrich et.al who backed Scozzafava feel, now that she's pulled out of the race? Not only pulled out, but she's backing the
democrat. I guess that means the support ACORN had thrown behind Scozzafava will be turned over to the democrat.
I don't know what's happened to Gingrich. I thought he was a smart guy. Maybe he's too smart, for his own, or the parties good. Endorsing a died-in-the-wool liberal was not a smart thing to do. But there were some good endorsements--MN Governor Tim Pawlenty, Sarah Palin, Dick Armey, Fred Thompson. I'm sure you recognize all these conservatives. It's like Rush always says...when we're conservative, we win, when we go moderate or crazy (my word), we lose. I think he's right, and I hope the conservatives of New York's 23 district pick the conservative. If they're voting for a future, they will.
The following is a link to a 2+ hour video that will make your blood boil and scare the crap out of you at the same time. Please, if you can't watch all of it, watch the last 30 minutes. Just drag the little button across...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VebOTc-7shU&feature=player_embedded
Posts
