Obama’s Big Concern Is Getting the Story Right

When will our political leaders get real?  The Wall Street Journal’s peerless Peggy Noonan asked that question last weekend in a column that was circulated widely, and it is probably high on the list of everyone else who cares about the state of the union For the time being, unfortunately, far from facing up to The Great Recession, our President has obsessed over “shaping a story” for the American people, presumably to soften us up for whatever it is that Big Government would purport to do next in our behalf. Mr. Obama went as far as telling an interviewer, Confidence Men author Ron Suskind, that dealing with the nation’s high unemployment had thus far failed because of the complexity of the problem, but also because “we didn’t have a clean story that we wanted to tell against which we could measure various actions.”  Come again?  It wasn’t “clean,” he explained, because “what was required to save the economy might not always match up with what would make for a good story.”  Nothing like a good yarn to help get the jobless back to work. Later in the interview, he amplified the point while inadvertently underscoring the smallness of his presidency: “The irony is, the reason I was in this office is because I told a story to the American people.”  Ahhh, so that’s what the hope and change thing was all about!

This fixation on what Noonan refers to as The Narrative has got to stop, she says, since there really is no story: “At the end of the day,” she writes, “there is only reality. Things work or they don’t. When they work, people notice, and say it.”  Unfortunately, political leaders on both sides of the aisle, unchallenged by a news media that is either too stupid or too lazy to deviate from the party line, seem to think our problems can be solved by talking about them and persuading Americans to see them in a certain way, rather than by simply acknowledging what is and attacking the problems at their source. No better example of U.S. politicians’ failure to face reality could be cited than yesterday’s news that the Senate will seek to sanction China with tariffs for allegedly manipulating its currency. The senators, voting 79-19, would have us believe that a supposedly underpriced yuan is a significant cause of our economic woes. Just what we need:  a trade war with China!  And has the Senate perhaps overlooked the fact that the U.S. economy would have tanked – really tanked — years ago if China, recycling its trade surplus, had not been a promiscuous buyer of U.S. Treasury debt?

For sure, quite a few of the clowns taking up space under the Rotunda are going to be  swept out of office in 2012. Will there be anyone to take their place with the courage to say what is, and to act appropriately?

***

(If you’d like to have Rick’s Picks commentary delivered free each day to your e-mail box, click here.)

  • Don Willetts October 7, 2011, 1:28 am

    And Peggy ought to know all about The Narrative, since she helped spin one for The Great Prevaricator (aka Ronald Reagan).

  • Chris T. October 6, 2011, 6:41 pm

    mario:

    “Could all of this roll into a cold war type scenario…”

    Interesting point.
    Despite what I said above, the future is certainly open.
    It would be interesting if China came up with their version of the Monroe Doctrine.

    And while I still don’t think that China harbors aggressive expansionist ideology, as opposed to the USSR, they would most certainly be a more formidable cold-war entity, given that they are not hobbling themselves economically the way the USSR did.

    Such an outcome would though not threaten us here, but could put us in our place elsewhere, esp. Taiwan.
    Would the US risk an engagement to protect Taiwan?
    I don’t think so.

    And Japan may yet come to regret having decided to go the non-nukes route.

    The US is not likely to be dethroned so far as to put is in realy jeopardy, but may cause is to tread more lightly.
    As I follow Ron Paul’s principles to foreing engagements/policy, I don’t see that as all bad, though the outcome would be better if arrived at by our decisionmaking, not by having that imposed on us.

  • James October 6, 2011, 3:05 pm

    “Will there be anyone to take their place with the courage to say what is, and to act appropriately?”

    No. Unless they lie to us, we will not vote for them.

    • Jill October 6, 2011, 11:52 pm

      True, dat.

  • Don October 6, 2011, 6:14 am

    Some really valid views. From my memory
    I do not remember Mr. Mao coming to D.C. to open this door for greater things with Mr. Nixon. I’m not going to denounce one kid for accumulating ounces of wealth while the other kid buys video games and then tries crying to mommy he has no assets. Perhaps we Americans need to pull the old cow’s tail back and take a hard look in the mirror.
    Solution to the mess we are in? I don’t have one.
    Wish you all the best.

  • D Barber October 6, 2011, 4:06 am

    I guess China is having difficulty keeping up with a depreciating dollar and Ben Burnanke.

  • Mario cavolo October 6, 2011, 3:36 am

    Chris JJ … Nice banter on china related… china has clearly won the economic poker game of the past ten years and in that sense JJ is right, they cleverly and aggressively expanded their spoils . In fact one beds to realize they are masters of the passive aggressive approach, but JJ I do have suggest your view that they are a military aggressor is way off base as Chris points up. Buildup is strategic to defend their spoils not conquer and spread their ideology or be the world’s policeman, etc…

    • John Jay October 6, 2011, 4:03 am

      Mario,
      Give China a chance, they are already alarming Vietnam, Japan, and the Philipines with their increasingly agressive behavior. They don’t need to match us ship for ship and aircraft for aircraft to be a credible threat. Living there you know they think decades ahead. I don’t know who was right or wrong in the Korean and Vietnam conflicts, but China had no problem in aiding those two countries against us. Isn’t it true that the People’s Liberation Army controls a lot of the industry in China? They can afford to wait us out, we are well on our way to committing financial suicide. It remains to be seen how agressive China will become when they decide we are out of the picture.

    • Mario cavolo October 6, 2011, 9:14 am

      Hi JJ , yes in fact the issue of China becoming far more arrogant and aggressive in it’s dealmaking has clearly come up in our govt briefs and other roundtable sessions we have. The smaller Asian countries are definitely approaching the U.S. asking for advice and support. China knows exactly what it is doing playing an increasingly aggressive hand as would naturally fit the current global economic balances and issues. Not sure how much they will temper themselves to play nicer… Could all of this roll into a cold war type scenario…

  • Robert October 6, 2011, 2:47 am

    Wow- the passion behind some of these posts actually gives me hope.

    and me? I cling to the most fundamental notion that a government powerful enough to give you everything you want is also powerful enough to take everything you have…

    For me, it is elemental:

    1) Stay out of my business. let the markets regulate my financial well being.

    2) stay out of my kitchen. If I want to consume non-genetically enhanced corn, or natural whole milk, then I should be able to do so. The health consequences are my responsibility to shoulder.

    3) stay out of my bedroom. In fact, stay the HELL OUT of my bedroom. I simply do not CARE what a politician deems as legitimate marriage. Marriage is not a legal issue- period. I would gladly forego all the tax breaks related to being married if government would simply come out one day and declare “we don’t exactly know what marriage is, so we are going to treat everybody (married or not) equally.” – that day is one that I would cheer.

    Ya know- in many ways I prefer the mob to government. At least the mob has the balls to eliminate judges that they don’t like. Government keeps judges on the bench even after they have proven themselves to be incompetent to the law beyond a shadow of a doubt.

    I will vote for Ron Paul (assuming Christie sticks to his word and stays out), but even RP gives me reason to pause. A man of his wisdom need not rant as often as he does. A man of his wisdom and experience should simply take the moral high ground, and let his platform formulate his position.

    • Chris T. October 6, 2011, 5:28 am

      “…and let his platform formulate his position.”

      assuming the means of conveyance of that platform aren’t obscured and fully open (a bad assumption), it still presumes a level of knowledge, and yes intelligence, in the public at large, that surely declares you to be a great, great optimist….

  • Rich October 6, 2011, 12:09 am

    Berg has a checkered past but won the ruling:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_J._Berg

    • Rich October 6, 2011, 12:14 am

      Very interesting to see Wiki site two sources that his petition 0against BHO and the FEC was dismissed, while two site cites say it was granted.

      We need a bona fide investigative journalist with the time and will to sort this out…

    • Rich October 6, 2011, 12:19 am

      Actually, he did not.
      It seems the brief granting summary judgment against Obama as ineligibible to run for President was not signed and just posted on numerous websites that picked it up and posted without reading it…

  • Rich October 6, 2011, 12:07 am

    Phil Berg is a lifelong Democrat who filed this ruling with the FEC before the 2008 election, which along with Pelosi, the DNC, DOJ, Supreme Court and monopoly media, ignored it:

    http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/berg_b_mot_sj.pdf

  • Rich October 6, 2011, 12:03 am

    Cqn: 2008 story…

  • Rich October 6, 2011, 12:02 am

    Speaking of 0 and The Story, why hasn’t this 2009 story been widely reported?:

    http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/pennsylvania/paedce/2:2008cv04083/281573/27/

  • John Jay October 5, 2011, 11:28 pm

    Chris,
    “Keep believing that we are just out there to bring salvation to humanity…”
    That is not what I believe at all.
    I know our foreign policy has been evil for decades but at this point we are bankrupt and need to do whatever it takes to survive. Our military is all we have left to back our currency. We all know it’s the biggest on the planet.
    China has gone way past the point of simply “bettering themselves”, they have engaged in economic warfare and as the brash Mr Trump states, they are laughing at us for letting them get away with it with no consequences in spite of their public pronouncements.
    I have no problem with balanced foreign trade, and I don’t see Germany, Great Britain, Canada, Brazil, as our enemies. Russia seems to be doomed to be run by alcoholic oafs, once you exempt Putin, who is neither.
    Our crude oil imports are government policy, we could have converted to alcohol decades ago. Russia has always run their Airforce on alcohol I believe, and Brazil runs all their cars on it. Oil imports are an orchestrated problem, we don’t need Middle East oil at all.
    That leaves China. I repeat we are bankrupt, and how we got there is now besides the point. We don’t even make shoes and socks here anymore in any quantity.
    Do you think we should walk around barefoot if China decides to teach us a lesson, and say it was meant to be?
    We need to look out for ourselves and not worry about what is fair or take China’s point of view into consideration. I repeat we are bankrupt , andwithout an industrial base, we need to take action.

    • Chris T. October 5, 2011, 11:55 pm

      Well that is certainly a rationalistic way of looking at it, and I can see your logic within that context.

      Of course I totally disagree with your conclusion as to this expediency, because it is not what the US was, or should be, even if it has become thus.

      It is completely correct to say that our situation is not good, and that hardship would be required to fix it.

      But is there no hardship when the club is used?
      There are other ways, not unpainful indeed, than the big club.

      The use of the club does cause plenty of harm itself.
      In fact one can make the argument that a non-militaristic fix, one we implement by changing ourselves costs no more than using the military to make others pay for our mistakes.

      Because if the direct military costs were indeed lower than real reforms (questionable), then only because we are trading the non-paid-for lives of our youth for some mulah we do not spend.
      That is the worse of the two choices.

      And such a choice does exist, but it would HURT those people who you correctly blame for much of this, the elite.

      With the military fix they not only gain by keeping the system that causes all of this for their benefit in place even longer, but also by all the money they directly suck out of us on military spending (who after all owns Haliburton, Blackwater or its new incarnation and so on)?
      Perhaps if we spend less time wasting our talent on making stuff that destroys, not produces, we would actually have domestic shoes.

      Much of what needs to be done has been outlined for many years as you can see from the Ron Paul comments above.
      Or read up on Antal Fekete’s “open the mint” comments.

      Again the only problem with all of this is that it directly endangers the kleptocracy, so they will not permit it, they prefer to keep robbing the rest of us and kill our kids (in the combats they send them to) to keep their orgy going.

      As to energy self-sufficiency:
      The East Coast is not self-sufficient in most of the foodstuffs consumed here, having to import it from the Midwest, California, Florida, etc, and there is no problem.
      In a truly free market world, the fact that there are human-construct borders between the US and say, Saudi Arabia should have no more import than the food from CA to NY.

      The price, except for the geographical difference costs (transportation) would be not much different, and the highest bidder would get the goods.

      What we want is to get the goods, while NOT being the highest bidder.
      No matter how we may try to protect that status, it is no sustainable in the long run.
      If alcohol were a true competitive substance to fossil fuel, it would require no subsidies.

      In fact in a total input investigation alcohol may actually be a negative consumer of energy, more is needed to make it than it provides. Where deos the excess come from? Fossil fuels.
      Some of those costs are externalities: the rape of the rain forrest in Brazil for example, and not sustainable in Brazil either long-term.

      We’ll stop using oil and coal when none is left to fasibly raise, no sooner…

  • Pat October 5, 2011, 9:48 pm

    Actually I think there is a strong likelihood that Obama could be re-elected. If the economy continues to sink and there are millions of more people getting some form of Government assisstance a year from now, who will they vote for? Probably the guy who wants to continue with the handouts?

    Other than Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, I don’t see any GOP candidate that has the guts to do what is needed to right the ship, and their chances of getting the nomination look mighty slim at the moment.

    And if you look at the polls, Obama is still running neck and neck with Romney and Cain, even as country is beginning to spin into chaos and despair. You would think Obama would be 20 points behind the GOP frontrunner, but thats not the case.

  • Chris T. October 5, 2011, 7:58 pm

    JohnJay:

    “China is our mortal enemy, period.”

    Rick’s, and the other’s reply, addresses that very well.

    But your statement also lacks huge amounts of historical context.

    China’s development model is no different from that of most other countries in the west, only they are doing it now, and not 100,200 years ago.

    Back in the 80s (and 90s) this “one sided” expoit-your people-for-export was seen as a good thing:
    It was to our benefit to have China exploit its own.
    This is what we were taught at Wharton, and in some form of the extant economic thought, is still a principle.

    Whatever such an economic policy’s worth, China is only doing what it feels it must, misguided or not.
    They are no worse than anyone else who did it that way.
    What’s good for the goos is good for the gander and makes our complaint today just be pure hypocrisy.

    More important though is China’s very, very long history.
    I have posted this before, but China simply does NOT have a history of aggressive expansion. They felt everyone was beneath them and there was nothing to be gained by conquest.

    That has not really changed. So, how can they be our mortal enemy?
    Not by an agressive expansionism ala the British or US empires (the USSR and others of course too), but only by doing well what they are doing, see above.

    If you define anypme who threatens your position as top dog as your mortal enemy, then you may be correct.
    But if that person only does their thing, and is better at it than you, without being any sort of agressor, then such a characterization is flawed and wrong.

    Any agression you may actually point to from China is reactive, ie not agressive but defensive.
    Economic blow-back if you will.

    Sadly, we always think we are right and anything “done” to us is not our fault.
    Rick points to exactly where our faults lie, to which one can only add the FRN’s.

    • John Jay October 5, 2011, 9:07 pm

      Chris,
      What would you call China’s economic policy in the past thirty years if not “agressive expansion”?
      What you were taught at Wharton is about as far removed from what is good for the average American as you can get.
      I already argued against Rick’s point of view that any mal-investment is “our fault”. Our government allowed us to spend trillions on OPEC crude oil when we could have easily converted to methanol for automobile fuel. Books have been written about just how to do it. That is half our trade deficit, crude oil.
      Then there are the trillions steered into the housing bubble with the end of the MBS prohibition, the 250k/500k tax free cap gains on housing, and ZIRP.
      All the Free Trade Agreements shipped out thousands of factories and millions of jobs, and we received what, exactly in return?
      Of course I feel that anyone who challenged our position as top dog is our mortal enemy. Do you think that at some point China is going to say, we’ve stripped enough of your factories and jobs? I don’t care if China’s history goes back ten thousand years, right now they are an economic menace and soon to be serious military threat.
      I will repeat, no average working American asked for or approved of what has been going on for the last thirty years. It has been sell outs, back door deals, and subterfuge.

    • Chris T. October 5, 2011, 10:41 pm

      “What you were taught at Wharton is about as far removed from what is good for the average American as you can get”

      I guess my mocking tone of voice didn’t come through in those words.
      Why I mentioned that is only to show that there was a time when the benefits we were getting (a way to keep away the manifestation of the ongoing inflation, meaning the higher prices) were seen in a positive way, and China’s (Japan really at the time, then them) actions as nothing problematic,

      What would I call those 30 years of China?
      I already explained that.
      They did not do this to conquer us, but to provide more for themselves.

      There is a difference between trying to improve oneself, and having that mean that others position is questioned by it, vs. wanting to go out to “conquer” those others.
      It is that expanionist mindset that I questioned.

      Your comment about :mortal enemy” in the context you place it has only one possible implication:

      ANY country that does not wish to have the US as its enemy must forego anything to improve itself, lest it becomes our enemy.
      That is total arrogance of the worst sort. We have no right to where we are.
      So, would India ever become our next mortal enemy, then perhaps Brazil, if they were up next on growth?

      Your logic justifies agression on our part, by claiming a defensive retaliation.
      So, we should bomb Saudi Arabia if they ever dare to stop taking dollars for their petro?

      It is precisely this kind of thought which caused World War I:

      Germany had developed a more dynamic economy than Great Britain, and they could see the writing on the wall, hence their switch to turn their centuries’ old enemy, France into an ally, and their century old friend and “country cousin” into an enemy.

      One thing about China:
      At least they pay for the resources they need (see the infrastructure projects in Africa, Libya etc), rather than taking over other countries as colonies, the way most Great Britain, France, the US and the other western economies did.

    • Chris T. October 5, 2011, 10:51 pm

      I forgot:

      “and soon to be serious military threat.”

      Yeah right.

      The US share of total world defense spending is about 50% (probably higher when counting the off-budget items).
      China is at barely 10% of our defense spending levels.
      That is a soon-to-be military threat?

      Sure they are unhappy about our navy skirting their country, but who wouldn’t be? How would we react to anyone else doing this to us?

      Their military is completely defensivly oriented, unlike our own, which is meant to project our power world wide, and by direct implication, threaten everyone to toe the line.

      All those ACBG helping to bankrupt us (at about 25billion a year per group) do not exist to protect the homeland, but to protect our status quo.
      Anytime someone pipes up a different tune, they are removed by the use of the projected power:
      Libya
      Irak
      as the two most recent examples.

      Keep believing that we are just out there to bring salvation to humanity…

  • Chris T. October 5, 2011, 7:04 pm

    “…too stupid or too lazy to deviate…”

    That list should be augmented with “too craven”, because not all of it is due to ignorance or sloth (one just needs to look at the silent anti-war press now as compared to 2001-2009 to see that).

    “Senate will seek to sanction China…”

    There is good news for once though:
    Just yet, both Russia and China vetoed another imperialistic western meddling resolution in the Security Coucil.
    Certainly payback for the Libya thing, but at least with respect to China, this Senate vote surely played a major role.
    Now just wait for voice from these DC pols that will see themselves justified for their sanction resolution because “China is not willing to play with the international community”.

  • C.C. October 5, 2011, 6:33 pm

    Here is an unpleasant reality:

    Barack Obama was elected out of popularity. Not ‘populism’ per say but rather ‘Pop’. As in ‘Pop-culture’, Pop-music and Pop-psychology…

    He is a reflection of Pop culture, with much the same ‘feel-good’ mojo as Clinton emanated, except amplified 100 fold due to his ‘color’. Make no mistake about it – he was elected based on the hidden condescension of many who wished to ‘raise up’ a Black man to a position of prominence. No greater form of ‘racism’ exists in my view – that of cleverly disguised ‘equality’ and ‘colorblind’ attitudes, when underneath none exists, save for what is politically expedient.

    John Kerry had is moment with the Black Churches, as did Clinton in his day, as prior examples.

  • Rich October 5, 2011, 6:15 pm

    Meanwhile, it looks like the 0 administration has its own Fast and Furious Watergate:

    http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/10/fast_and_furious_let_it_bleed.html

  • james olson October 5, 2011, 5:47 pm

    I’m not blaming China, but if China had not bought our debt we might have woken up sooner. We kept our addiction to debt going because China kept feeding it. That said, I agree with Noonan. I’m all for telling the people the truth. If our political leaders had done that we wouldn’t be in this situation.

  • John Jay October 5, 2011, 5:12 pm

    Rick,
    The mal investment by US industry was not the fault of you and I. Plenty of capital was and is available to this day, there are trillions on the sidelines earning essentially zero looking for a home. While the average Joe does not save anything, that is more than made up for by the outsized savings of people like the ones on this blog. Profits that could have been invested in USA manufacturing were either piled up in family trusts, used for stock buybacks, or used to open offshore factories. There was money to modernize our steel mills and auto plants etc. back in the seventies. Big business refused to do it and placed outsized blame on the unions. We have not built a new oil refinery since the 1980s. If XOM and CVX made a couple of phone calls, I am sure any EPA problems would be quashed and refineries would be built pronto. Remember the corporate raiders that I believe started when someone took over Bekins Van Lines to sell off Bekins real estate that was on the books for a pittance. Our government rigged the destruction of our manufacturing base by a lack of protective tariffs, encouraging the export of our factories, and bogus Free Trade Agreements to essentially drain our wealth for decades. The Federal government not only did nothing to promote real jobs here, their policy was to scuttle that ship. We should stop blaming ourselves up like a battered wife when we did nothing wrong and we have been sold out by own government to enrich a thousand oligarchs.
    When we have sunk so low that we have our military wondering if Chinese computer chips installed in our weapons may be a threat it is past time to take some ation.

  • gary leibowitz October 5, 2011, 3:04 pm

    As sure as I was we would fall into a world wide deflationary economic nightmare I was equally sure that whomever took office would be blamed.

    I do believe Obama was hired simply because we had an economic calamity (implosion) right smack during the election. If anyone cared to look at the polls one week before the financial collapse he was down by over 10 points. That my friend would have been one of the largest margins of loss ever!

    We went thru this before but need I remind you that the laws of nature can’t be undone like some comic strip character. The world wide financial collapse underscored the decades of over promising and spending by all parties.

    This episode is analogous to a Dam failing. You can’t patch and paste it back. It must be rebuilt. Believe it or not but there was absolutely nothing anyone could have done at that point to mitigate the outcome. It will take a long hard process of pain and political readjustment.

    A Capitalistic society by its very nature will always go thru these Boom (greed)/Bust(fear) cycles.

    The ranting on this board about placing blame is funny. At the very moment you are complaining we have the widest disparity between rich and poor and the largest ownership of wealth by the smallest group ever recorded.

    It reminds me of the riots in New York City during the Civil War. You could pay your way out of serving at that time. The riots however placed the blame on the least afluent and least likely a villain, the Blacks.

    I suppose the seeds weren’t sown when Bush announced a 10 trillion dollar 10 year plan to help the rich become the dominant power it is today. In fact that plan was already extended during the worst world wide economic collapse since WWII. No debates or outrage there.

    While the well off will be discomforted by this calamity the others will simply fall out of society.

    You could label me a ranting liberal but the facts speak for themselves. Every single economic collapse was a result of either war or greed by the most powerful. The rspresentation for the masses has always been a smoke screen. Power and influence has always been the “free enterprise” way. When the imbalance is too great it all implodes upon itself.

    • John Jay October 5, 2011, 4:19 pm

      Gary,
      We have to complain on this board because we have no political power or voice in the USA . Public opposition to TARP was about 80% I believe, Congress passed it anyway. War is spreading like cancer in the Middle East/North Africa. Now we are exchanging gunfire with Pakistani troops. For what? Right now we are at the rudderless rage stage. If enough people start to complain loud enough, perhaps a trustworthy leader will emerge from the crowd. It will be a fits and starts process, we are starting from scratch, just like in the 1770s.

    • Rich October 5, 2011, 6:14 pm

      Public opposition to 0Care was even higher JJ and Pelosi/Reid rammed it through without even reading it as promised by the ‘most transparent administration yet’…

    • gary leibowitz October 5, 2011, 7:04 pm

      The first order of business is understanding who is to blame and where to direct that blame. If the complaint is socialism run amok then perhaps you should have complained when Bush passed the largest costliest prescription plan in our history. I guess as long as the economy kept humming along everyone ignored the consequence. As long as everyone got a piece of the pie there was no complaining.

      Plave the blame on ourselves. We the people elected inot office anyone that promised a better life for all. Had they told and enacted the true nature of what needed to be done they would never had made office. Had they enacted what needed to be done there would be an outcry the likes of which have never been seen before.

      The rich blame the poor and socialistic programs that allow the poor and middle class to remain lazy without any real work ethics. The poor blame the rich and powerful for cutting their programs first before all others. 10 trillion to the super rich and take aways from government workers pay and prriviliges. The middle class blame the banks and wall street for allowing housing to implode, their biggest investment.

      What you may not realize is that it isn’t politicians that become aware of these changes and change course, it’s the people.

      Change is always hard to accept. When presented with no choice it becomes a lot easier. We are now on easy street. Change is inevitable.

    • fallingman October 5, 2011, 9:04 pm

      Okay, this “everyone got a piece of the pie – we the people elected them – place the blame on ourselves” crap has got to stop. Don’t place the blame on me or most of the other people on this site.

      Who here didn’t complain when the smirking chimp passed Medicare Part D prescription drug legislation in a venal…and successful…attempt to buy votes? I sure as hell did. So, who exactly are you talking to?

      Who here supports the two party electoral system and its choice of two hand-picked insider “elite” candidates?

      I never voted for anyone who promised a better life for all through handouts. I never supported corporatism.

      I never asked for or got a piece of the pie, because I don’t seek to parasitize others.

    • gary leibowitz October 5, 2011, 11:33 pm

      Yes I agree with you. Your only option is to keep voting out the incumbent until the 2 party system is either modified or expanded to allow for true change.

      I just want to point out that depending on your own circumstance most focus on their own universal concerns. The ones that drive home the bacon. Altuistic motives are rare to find. Would you sacrifice for the common good of others? This is how the political system plays one against the other. To really enforce change we must change the political system to treat serving as a sacrifice, not a full time powerful job. Full financial disclosure, fixed terms, no lifetime benefits, no kick-backs after office, etc…

      Reinvent the meaning of taking political office. If you do that than you can pick honest people with good intentions to serve. Not sure that will make their choices any smarter, but you will know it was a choice out of their desire to do right, with no ulterior motive.

    • fallingman October 6, 2011, 12:56 am

      Utter pipe dream.

      Government is corrupt and corrupting by its very nature. You can’t reform government by getting good people with pure motives in there anymore than you could reform the mafia by filling its ranks with nicer people.

      It’s the mafia. Their thing is criminal activity. The government operates on essentially the same business plan. “You need a dumpstah”…and you’re gonna pay for it, whether you want it or not…or you’re gonna get hurt. It’s a protection/extortion racket.

      There was a great cartoon recently. A young boy comes to his father and announces that he’s decided to go into organized crime.

      The father pauses, then asks, “Public sector or private sector?”

      Any government big enough to do all the things you statist types want it to do is muscular enough to be worth taking over. And it’ll be taken over by those with the requisite money, power, and influence. It’s axiomatic.

      It has been taken over…and now it’s game over.

      The silent coup is complete

  • charlie brown October 5, 2011, 2:36 pm

    That which is often said, “all the skills in the world can’t make anything or any situation idiot proof against determined idiots. The greatest truths are the simplist and so are the greatest men & women.

  • Buster October 5, 2011, 1:52 pm

    Expecting any real solutions from these ‘leaders’ (sorry, I shouldn’t even use the word to describe these murderous thieves) is downright ludicrous!
    I have a pool of sharks. Would any of you care to climb in & persuade them to stop eating meat?
    No-one, hey?
    Then why does anyone expect the best democratic system money can buy to change it’s ways? It was bought by the power to print money by the elitists, who place their front-men on the stage to whittle a story for the masses. Watch ‘The Obama Deception’ to see why telling a good story always was Obama’s real job.
    All the while the country is raped for the benefit of the few, & the majority are undermined financially, physically & psychologically, without even knowing it.
    The ‘whore’ who we all struggle against, though more complex than is apparent to most, does appear to be quite well defined…It is a religious/financial/military-industrial empire. It is based in three cities, all tax free states within their respective countries… Vatican city for the religious control, the City of London for the control of the worlds’ financial system, & Washington DC for the Military industrial complex ‘department’. All three have their roots deep in history and serve the elitists global crusade of control. This empire is allowed to exist & exert it’s influence over the world because the self seeking rulers of nations have cut deals with this whore. The Federal Reserve private bank was just a part of this deal.
    Why does anyone look for answers from the very people who are the problem? The scum always seems to rise to the top, yet the masses believe that these authoritive sounding crooks are worthy of their trust & faith.
    Fools!
    “Do not put your trust in nobles, nor in the son of earthling man, to whom no salvation belongs.”—Ps. 146:3.

  • Justin October 5, 2011, 1:50 pm

    This is poignant:
    Mohammed Ali on First Black U.S President

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P93mPk6EExk&feature=related

    • fallingman October 5, 2011, 8:43 pm

      Beautiful. What a guy.

    • DG October 5, 2011, 11:05 pm

      I think Christie was channelling “The Greatest” when he declined to run. No one can coach a team full of losers and expect victory. So why try? Let some other putz take the fall in 2012….
      I am not suggesting that Americans are losers, but until folks abandon their ridiculous allegiance to various dogmas, parties, whatever….they will behave like losers and will lose. How about the truth?
      VegasBob’s post above is an excellent example of being dogmatically committed to the democratic party, but still thinking freely and judging Obama under the lens of the truth. bravo.

      Listen to some of the OWS interviews….hear the statement of disgust with the political system and then they cap it with Obama 2012….like listening to a wife beaters wife trying to convince you that her husband is a good guy.

      Here’s some truth:
      Bill Clinton blew it when he failed to listen to Brooksly Born and instead chose Summers, Rubin and Greenspan…throw in Phil Gramm, abandon Glass Steagal and then the CMA nonsense.
      Bush saw that and raised it…deficits don’t matter and neither do regulations or leverage limits….and while I am at it I’ll repeal the 4th amendment…
      Obama…more of the same…and then some…

      its a joke and very few politicians either understand it or do and are so corrupt it is disgusting.

  • DanX October 5, 2011, 11:14 am

    “For sure, quite a few of the clowns taking up space under the Rotunda are going to be swept out of office in 2012. Will there be anyone to take their place with the courage to say what is, and to act accordingly?”

    Very few, I’m afraid…very few. But even that would be a start.

    • mario cavolo October 5, 2011, 1:12 pm

      I had a reaction to this comment. Regardless of their intent, courage and conviction to do so, they will not have the means to act accordingly… The situation is similar to the current Chinese govt leadership cadre which still has amongst its ranks the first line old Red Guard types. Frankly and realistically, the shift of political ideals is taking place, however it is very much of function of when they finally end up six feet under, making room for new blood. I view the current govt/bankers elite regime in control of the United States much the same way. Unless several of them finally get their due and end up in jail, they’ll be in power for many more years to come til death do us part and open the opportunity for new blood and new power to finally step in… Yes, then, I think we are all very much stuck with the current cadre of self-serving elitists.

  • mario cavolo October 5, 2011, 9:49 am

    Indeed, picking on China for just about any reason is just another indicator further underscoring the misguided direction and piss poor leadership that the U.S. citizenry has to stomach. Fortunately I can say that as of late, even with the ridiculous ongoing, mostly baseless negative MSM and govt bias ad nauseum against China, U.S. exports to China are in fact up substantially…bravo to that step in the right direction. Let’s see less of the empty narrative Rick so well points up today and more of the same kind of productive results the U.S. needs moving forward…

    Meanwhile, I have an important question; in fact, who IS doing the buying. Is it in fact just daboyz playing their games, or is it the smart money who knows in fact, that underneath the mess, in looking at all the choices of where to put your assets across the globe, the stock market valuations “aint so bad in fact”. For example, when I look at the Hong Kong Exchange hovering around 16-17,000 now there are very good reasons to think that a portfolio of well-selected U.S. and Asian value/dividend stocks should be just about 40% of everyone’s long-term asset portfolio. Furthermore I’m looking at stocks like caterpillar, disney, carnival (great revenue and earnings, how does that make sense if things are so bad?) and many others already beaten to hell down over 50% from their highs…

    So where does relative dividend-paying stock “value” fit into the otherwise self-serving nauseating Washington and MSM “narrative”?

    Cheers, Mario

    • John Jay October 5, 2011, 2:46 pm

      Mario,
      China is a very large problem and has been so decades. China is our mortal enemy, period. To be blunt, the elites in the US moved manufacturing plant, equipment, and jobs to China, and then allowed them carte blanche access to our markets.
      This enabled them to get their manufacturing off the ground at our expense. Any money they accumulated in Treasuries over the years, they were essentially allowed to steal from American workers.
      Now they are using our own money to threaten us when Congress finally finds their backbone. If Nixon had never allowed the economic dominoes to start falling with his China policy, they would still be at the backyard blast furnace stage or close to it. We have been crushed in a one sided trade war with the rest of the world, and China is the worst of our foes. Any tiny gains in exports are table scraps fed to a dog in comparison. The problem here is manufacturing jobs lost to other countries that wont even allow us to export rice or beef to them, not to mention the 200% tariffs on autos we might sell. The same thing has occured with OPEC for decades, as we gave away trillions in wealth which created skyscrapers in the deserts for regimes that hate us. I again use Germany as an example of a country where the government has not sold out the workers with babble about “Global Competition”, and did not turn to Ponzi real estate schemes to mask a gutted economy, such as our government aided and abetted. Germany may very likely bring back the Deutschmark, and tell the Eurozone good bye and good luck. They laughed out loud at Timmy G, just as the Chinese did. Now that we are sqatting in the financial ruins of our economy, DC prattles on about job creation and refinancing schemes for the deflating real estate bubble. For our economy, there is no there there.
      We are in a financial death spiral and if a trade war with China is what it takes get our manufacturing back here, better today than tomorrow. Another five years and our military will be bankrupt and we will be at the mercy of China in that department too. Time to stop being so damn polite to China etc. and put American workers first, second, and third while there is still time left to us.

      &&&&&&

      John: I would attribute China’s devastating victory over the U.S. in the trade war to America’s egregious undersaving and malinvestment since World War II. If we had been more like the ant and less like the grasshopper, saving and investing more rather than squandering our capital on McMansions, two-ton vehicles and consumer goods, we would be more than competitive with China today. Although we would not necessarily have been able to overcome their cost-of-labor advantage completely even with the most modern manufacturing equipment, we would have retained a significant edge simply because of their shipping costs. RA

    • mario cavolo October 5, 2011, 2:57 pm

      Well said JJ, and I’m thinking that there is a bottom line at the root of it which is the much lower labor costs available in China (and several other countries which have cheap labor). In fact, it is reminiscent of the U.S. who also built the country in the 1700’s to 1900’s on cheap labor and slave labor. I remember seeing a TV expose’ many years ago on Tyson foods chicken plants in Mexico, got everyone up in a fury about worker’s conditions and low salaries, etc…same old story and something which China clearly has taken advantage of…the U.S. govt and corporate leadership was all too willing to sell it’s soul over the years. Back when I was a teen, I recall the stories of how the Japanese bought up Hawaii, etc…same old story and no easy answers…Cheers, Mario

    • Rich October 5, 2011, 6:11 pm

      Esteemed John, Mario, Rick et al
      Chinese corruption paid Presidents like Bush and Clinton under the table for moving American Multinational intellectual capital and productivity offshore to them.
      UBS estimates even if China has a soft landing, Asian markets may further contract by -18%…

    • C.C. October 5, 2011, 6:20 pm

      Mario –

      The ‘piss poor’ leadership the U.S. has had to stomach, has been stomached for the past 40+ years running… How many more years do we give the oh-so-wise U.S. public a pass on ignorance?

      The Right vs. Left dynamic – with all its attendant orthodoxies, is precisely the reason why we are at where we’re at presently.

      Such is the reason why a man like Ron Paul is ‘unelectable’ – even so to otherwise staunch supporters of Original Intent.

      The American Public has become conditioned – to a point that would have made Ivan Pavlov envious. Although many ‘see’ the problem, few wish to extricate themselves from their intractable political positions, but for no other reason than it’s ‘what they know’. And many times, what one knows is safer than what they don’t – which in the case of modern day America, is Liberty.

  • VegasBob October 5, 2011, 8:01 am

    Ms. Noonan hit the nail on the head. Politicians on both the left and the right ask us to believe in their self-serving “narratives.” The trouble is that their narratives have nothing at all to do with reality.

    I vote Democratic simply because I have no use for the Republican platform of “God, guns and gays.” Most of my friends are liberals, and a few actually have some economic sense in their heads. Virtually all of us have concluded that Barack Obama is simply not up to the task of leading this country out of its economic morass.

    None of us is prepared to vote Republican in 2012, but most of us are inclined to vote third party or stay at home rather than vote to re-elect Obama. Obama should emulate LBJ and simply announce that he will not stand for re-election. If he stays in the 2012 race, my guess is that Obama loses in a landslide, even if the Republicans run a Loony-Tunes ticket of Bachmann and Palin.

    If this country is to survive and prosper, then a true leader will emerge from one of our political parties and start telling the truth about our economic prospects, and rally the country. I must confess that I am not optimistic that this will occur. This country may already be too far gone. I think it far more likely that the US will continue to sink down to the level of a Third World Banana Republic.

    • Rick Ackerman October 5, 2011, 8:43 am

      Great post, Bob. Barring a significant drop in unemployment between now and the election, I agree that there is no Republican in the field that would lose to Obama — not even Bachmann/Palin. Not that that will prevent a shamelesly biased press from reporting “poll results,” with a straight face, such as the recent, preposterous Gallup claim that Obama would beat Romney in California. Has Obama picked up even a single vote since last November, when he and nearly everything that he stands for were repudiated in a landslide? Arguably not. In fact, he has lost the votes of quite a few who avidly supported him in 2008.

      The fact that he is even considered a viable candidate can only be attributed to the news media’s spurious and relentless insistence that this is the case. As for “pulling an LBJ,” presumably throwing the nomination to Hillary, he seemingly lacks the self-awareness and good sense to bring himself to such an obvious decision. To underscore his obtuseness, he is now referring to himself as the “underdog.” Let’s enjoy watching the mainstream media tie itself in knots trying to turn that metaphor into a winning campaign.

    • Rich October 5, 2011, 6:05 pm

      Two words VB:
      Ron Paul…

    • Chris T. October 5, 2011, 7:34 pm

      Rich beat me to the punch with his two words.

      “will emerge from one of our political parties and start telling the truth”

      I find interesting that Bob and his friends will stay away because they can not vote for Obama, but can not vote Republican for the reasons given.

      With respect to Ron Paul, at least for god and gays, he is on your wavelength, not the mainstream R party.
      He made clear that it is not for the state to legislate or get involved in those issues.
      Guns you would disagree with him I assume, because like for the other G’s, he believes the state should stay out of controlling this, esp, but not only, because of the Constitution.

      In any case “will emerge” is very optimistic on your part, and within the larger public, Ron Paul is the perfect example of the difficulty of that.
      Because the whole system does not want such an outcome, and fights it tooth and nail.

      Last time around you had some great examples:

      the documented shenanigans and fraud in the Republican primaries (by the establishment) to keep Ron Paul supporters at bay, even to the tune of getting RP delegates votes uncounted.

      In S.C. there was a republican senate candidate who had a similar philosophy to Ron Paul’s.
      The Rep establishment, and its sycophant preachers in the churches, then went on to support the Democratic candidate.
      They would rather hurt their own party’s candidate, than to see the system they serve be endangered.

      It will take a long time for this “will emerge”…

    • Benjamin October 5, 2011, 10:23 pm

      Chris T said: “Because the whole system does not want [Ron Paul elected], and fights it tooth and nail.”

      And that is why Herman Cain will be our next president. I hadn’t gotten around to scrutizing him until recently, as until recently he’s been a relative nobdy in the MSM. But here is why Cain is perfect for the agenda to bring the U.S. to total ruin or genuine economic recovery (to a repsectble extent, at least)…

      1) Former Kansas City Federal Reserve chairman.
      2) But not without his (considerable) private sector credentials and successes.
      3) Educated (mathematics and computer science).
      4) Former Navy serviceman.
      5) Pro gold standard (the details I’m not sure of).
      6) Pro interventionst, militarily/politically.
      7) Favored TARP because it was “necessary”.

      Ladies and gents, say hello to the next POTUS. I mean, who else can measure up to him? But I’m not exactly thrilled over this. While he is clearly an experienced, competent, and bold man, he’s also a very useful tool for the Federal Reserve and corporatism (not a useful fool, like Obama, Perry, Romney, etc).

      We’ll probably see some genuine economic relief under such a president, but I have to ask at what cost.
      Of course, if he chooses Ron Paul as his VP, or at least includes him in a relevant position in his cabinet… I’ll worry a little less.

      At any rate, the assassin-in-cheif is done for. But probably not before he raises and summarily misplaces billions in “campaign funds”, as compensation for ensuring the vote for Cain and his buddies in the Federal Reserve.

    • VegasBob October 6, 2011, 1:09 am

      I’m not opposed to Ron Paul. I could probably vote for him, but I doubt he or a candidate with his views will ever be on any ballot I see. The Republican establishment would never permit a candidate with Ron Paul’s views to be nominated.

    • Rich October 7, 2011, 1:48 am

      By the time this economic debacle unwinds to Tuesday after the first Monday in November 2012, Ron Paul may be written in by every voter who cherishes life, liberty and prosperity.
      That is, if we even have a democratic republic with free ballots by then…

    • Michael October 7, 2011, 11:39 am

      VegasBob replied: “I’m not opposed to Ron Paul. I could probably vote for him, but I doubt he or a candidate with his views will ever be on any ballot I see.

      Looks like you live in NV, a caucus state. You and your friends can set the course of history and have a GREAT TIME STICKING IT TO THE GOP. It’s simple, really.

      1) Change your voter registration to R. (free, takes 10 minutes)
      2) Go to your local caucus and support the Ron Paul guys – some average “Bob” like you. (free, takes a couple hours).

      Search meetup.com for a local Ron Paul meetup and hook up with some motivated and interesting people.

      For a story of a lifetime, try to get you and yourself to the state GOP convention. You can help make history and have fun there!

      Check out “blue republicans” group on facebook. They are registering R for this purpose.

  • Joseph October 5, 2011, 7:44 am

    I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’ve had it up to here with Mr. Obama. My goodness, what a piece of work.