Swine Flu--Let's get a little Hysterical, shall we!?

Everybody! Run for the hills! The Swine Flu is here!

As I have been telling everyone for years now, this is all the fault of those damn Mexicans! They have been bringing this over the border, and infecting all of our catholic school children in the border towns like New York City!

Get the border patrols! Bring in every National Guard and Reservist that isn't on their 6th tour in Iraq, and line 'em up on the Mexican border. Orders are "shoot to kill" anyone even thinking about making a run at the border for America. After all, a few thousand cases of the flu have been reported in Mexico. That must mean that at least 20-30 MILLION people in Mexico have it. And you know what that means? A MASS INFLOW of Mexicans into America for our free health care, and while here, maybe they can have a few babies, and stay, once they have sucked our health system dry.

It does make you wonder, though, doesn't it? Why all these countries EXCEPT Islamic countries have reported incidents of Swine flu. It's those al-Queda folks, they are so smart. They decided to create a virus that only affects non-Muslims, and instead of bringing it to America (that would be too obvious!) bring it to MEXICO, so it can be smuggled in to the US undetected, just like laundered money, or cocaine. No al-Queda fingerprints. Smart! And Obama is just using this whole thing to scare the Senate into finally confirming that baby-killer, totally incompetent Nazi-like Kathleen Sebelius as Health and Human Services Secretary. See, you need to stay vigilent about these conspiracies, my friends...

Personally, I am going to follow Michael Savage's advice, and use this as an excuse to boycott all products using illegal immigrants. It's going to be a real pain at first, since I am going to have to screen all the companies, and the people, but after a while, you just start to get a sense for who's not really "one of us", you know what I mean?

Wow! When you step back and look at it all from a distance, it is so obvious that all of the paranoia and fear-mongering from Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage and Rush Limbaugh isn't really fear-mongering. They are really right! I guess it's time to go all "Galt" on America, and pick up my bat and ball and move to someplace like Bermuda. Maybe there's no swine flu there. Or illegals, terrorists, Mexicans, gays, pacifists, left-handers, fat people, bald people, short people, ugly people, narcoleptics, people with restless leg syndrome, gigantic eye-ball sufferers, allergy-sufferers, dog lovers......

Spector, Specter, Spectre?

My favorite James Bond movies were the first ones, with Sean Connery battling SPECTRE (Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion) in "From Russia with Love", "Dr. No", "Thunderball" and others. Equally enjoyable was to see Mike Myers and his team lampoon these great movies in his "Austin Powers" movies, making insane references to characters like "Number 2", "Random Task", and even the ultimate nemesis "Dr. Evil".



But unlike the SPECTRE consortium of evil, or even the recent celeb turned murder suspect Phil Spector, in this case, the news of the day is about our Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter, and the news that he is switching parties, from Republican to Democrat.



From a pure logistical standpoint, this is enormous on a couple of fronts. First, it gives the Democrats a 59th Senator to closing out the cloture votes on Republican Filibusters. If the Dems can ever get through the legal wranglings of Minnesota law, and get Al Franken seated, they would have their magic 60 Senators to supposedly thwart a filibuster.



Additionally, and to me, more importantly, it is a sign that the moderate wing of the Republican Party is dying a painful death. Moderates like Specter have all but vanished from the political landscape these days, but the remaining moderates still carried with them some semblance of the old Eisenhower Republicans, the "Rockefeller" Republicans. That party has all but vanished. The Northeast Republican is completely gone. Gone are the Warren Rudmans, Lowell Weickers, John and Lincoln Chafees, and Arlen Specters. A part of the country with 117 electoral votes (Maine to Maryland/DC) used to be a Libertarian Republican bastion of steady habits, limited government intervention on taxes and spending, secular, civil rights, and socially independent-minded. This used to define the Northeast Republican. That party is now officially gone. Only Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe remain, and even they have all the clout in the Republican Party of a Charlie Crist, or Jim Bunning.



There is a contrarian thought going through my head right now, that says that Specter's move is a simple desperation play. That he knows he can win a general election over Pat Toomey, and once re-elected, he will simply change parties again. But I really think Specter has come to the conclusion that his political views that used to represent the old line Republican values, no longer have a place in the party.



And this is a shame. Because there are many political issues that really need a two-sided debate. But Republican leadership has become so adherent to the Right Wing of the party there is no longer room for the Arlen Specters of the party. Most of his colleagues have already been voted out (see Chafee, Gordon Smith, Chris Shays). All that is left is a shrinking minority that is basically hoping for...what? A terrorist attack? A Great Depression? The pull to the Right of this party has left one more Republican without a party. And in this case, I fear that if the GOP doesn't get its act together, it will end up being thrown totally into chaos.



For my Liberal friends, this sounds like heaven. But I warn the Left, that without a righteous and faithful opposition, leaders can easily spin out of control, and begin to make dangerous decisions right under our noses. Right now, there isn't enough collaboration, leading to the best possible solutions. There is only partisan politics, leading to a tyranny of the majority. Many on the left feel it is just payback for the Bush years, but I would remind them of the great quote that I heard Alan Simpson use on a talk show a few years back.



"..[be careful] when using the automatic fanny-kicker on the minority party, because when the tables turn, and it's you in the minority, you can't seem to find the 'off' button on that thing..."



Specter will be a constructive voice in the debates that lie ahead for this Congress. Let's make sure this is a first step towards broader consensus, and not just a 60th vote for a Liberal agenda. Let's hope our leaders in Washington have the wisdom to recognize the difference between the two concepts.

Red Sox Nation has taken over my soul

This happens every April. Winter has beaten me down, with the cold, the dark, the snow, etc. I merely survive January and February, to get to March. Only March ends up being the ultimate head-fake, serving up only continuing cold temperatures, no work holidays, and 31 days that seem to last about 310.

But April finally arrives. The days get longer, the temperatures start to moderate. The trees start to bloom. The Masters Golf tournament is played. And my favorite thing of all, baseball, begins in earnest.

For a long, long time, it was a badge of honor to be a Red Sox fan, like myself. We would smile, and joke about the fact that this "could be" the year, but deep down, we knew that there would always be a new, and more gut-wrenching way to watch our beloved team break our hearts.

All of that changed in 2004, with the World Series victory, and the release of all of that pent up frustration, and anger with the baseball Gods. Now, I could relax, and watch a baseball game in peace, without ever having to answer those irksome questions, "how could your team have ever traded that Ruth guy away? Aren't the Sox ever going to win another World Series? "

Since 2004, the Red Sox have won a second title, and I have now come to see this new team of scrappy, can-do guys as my salvation. They are my motivation to get me through these days of economic downturns, layoffs, swine flu, partisan bickering, and torture memos.

Watching the Red Sox/Yankees series this weekend really reminded me that without certain passions in life, all of the political rhetoric, and hum-drum of our daily lives isn't worth the time and effort. We go to work, and take care of our families because we love them. But certain things, we all do for ourselves.

For me, watching the Red Sox sweep the Yankees this weekend was a reminder of what I work so hard for. To support and root for a team that has seen hard times, and has seen defeat, sometimes as heartbreaking as there can be in sports, and to have also achieved the ultimate success--it is something I struggle to explain to my wife, and to the non-sport fanatic. But it is something that I can still marvel at much as I did when I was 8 years old. It's a reminder that there are always new chances in life. New beginnings. And that giving your pursuits your best effort can mean victory, even in the face of a superior foe. It is the idea that sometimes, wanting it more than the more talented opposition IS enough to win the day. And it motivates you to come to work the next day with a resolve to do better than yesterday.

Unlike basketball or hockey, baseball really means Spring and Summer are here. Possibilities are endless. The world has the opportunity to make itself over once more. And do it better this time. For me, that's the greatest thing about Spring. And baseball. And life in general. It's never too late for a do-over. And a new chance to win at something, even in the face of long odds.

Republican Party Definition Debate

I keep coming back to this topic on the Pragmatic Pundit. Partly because I am an election junkie, and partly because I am looking for political shifts in both the Democratic and Republican Parties. There have been some interesting movements recently, but much of it remains "stage setting" for next year's main event.

And the Republican Party has a lot to be concerned about. Obama's popularity has stayed strong with the electorate as a whole, and it is demoralizing to some. And confidence hasn't been exactly riding high. Among recent set backs:

-The Congressional Election for the NY-20th district was conceded as a loss for the GOP Congressional Candidate, Jim Tedisco. This was a terrible loss for a district with about 70,000 more registered Republicans than Democrats. It really shows that New York, once a state with a strong moderate Republican voting block, has gone deep blue over the past 5-10 years. If Republicans won't develop a moderate plank, it may be time to write off New York entirely.

-Norm Coleman continues to lose appeal after appeal to Al Franken. At this point, it is beginning to look terrible for Coleman, not to mention Tim Pawlenty, for refusing to certify election results.

-Fundraising by Michael Steele has been less than spectacular, given the fact that a part time DNC Chairman, Tim Kaine, has essentially matched their fundraising efforts during the first quarter of 2009. The GOP should be way ahead on this front. It is a sign of an uninspired base.

-Both Pennsylvania and Arizona have put up Conservative challenges to Arlen Specter and John McCain. It is a sign that the GOP is NOT going to try to tack to the center, but it is going for broke, and pushing for Conservative purity. Hey, why not? The line of thinking isn't totally out of line, from a tactical standpoint. But the Conservatives have to hope that enough goes wrong in the country, that people have no alternative but to turn to the Conservative party. After all, that may be all that's left of the GOP at this rate.

-Sarah Palin, Bobby Jindal, and Rick Perry have all looked just terrible in recent months. All have, in their own way, showed themselves to be ill prepared to compete with Obama.

But Republicans should take some heart. After all, not all is lost here:

-Tax Tea Parties had a lot of support, and probably give some depressed Conservatives hope that they are not alone. The next step, though, is to continue the momentum. If Conservatives want to regain some power, or at least a voice, it is time to take these events, and start to craft a message.

-A leader in Newt Gingrich is starting to take shape. Newt seems to be able to provide the kind of thoughtful opposition to Obama's agenda that the John Boehners, Eric Cantors, and Michael Steeles just can't seem to muster. It may be time to go all in with Newt.

-Democratic overreach on Torture--it appears that the left wing of the democratic party has been pushing for a full disclosure on the torture issue. In the end, this could really backfire on the Dems, as they find that their own leaders were also involved in decision making, and that a majority people in America would trade torture for peace.

In all, stark choices on Immigration, Taxes, Gay Rights, Foreign Policy, and Bank Bailouts are all areas Republicans should be highlighting, and gaining back seats in Conservative areas in the next election. They have yet to show that they have organized themselves strategically, however. What I don't see is a plan to target the seats and the candidates that can define the issues favorable to Republicans, and start to hammer that message home in these districts. If the Republicans don't start to get their message together, they are going to lose control of the message, and they may be completely marginalized in 2010.

I am sure they wouldn't care about my advice, but if the GOP wants to regain power, or even start to gain some seats again in 2010, it will take more than hoping that the other guy fails. Start making the case for the GOP to be the party that leads. Start taking back those districts in Red States that lean Conservative. It's time for the GOP to get its act together. I have yet to see a real push in this direction. Time is starting to get short here.

Torture Prosecutions--Let Sleeping Dogs Lie

The Obama administration seems to be of two minds in their recent positions on prosecuting those who have advocated or justified the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques", or "torture", to gain intel critical to the defense of the USA.

On the one hand, Obama has indicated that he will not go after those who put these interrogation methods to use (ie, not prosecuting those "just following orders"), yet on the topic of prosecuting those justifying the use of these tactics, his position has been very opaque. He appeared to be giving the Bush Administration Senior team a pass, but then also indicated that, as a rule of law, the Attorney General would have to make decisions on the legality of their behavior.

And the pundits and lawmakers on both sides have been howling for a solution to this matter that suits their worldview.

So, once again, we are in a messy situation, left over from the previous administration, with Obama, having to act as King Solomon once did, to come up with a satisfactory solution to an impossible situation.

And it is NOT as simple as either side would have you believe. At this point, though, I think pursuing legal remedies to attempt to prosecute those who approved and pushed these questionable tactics would be a mistake. Here's why:

1. History--As we have learned in Washington, even noble ideals get easily corrupted by political ideology and personal agendas. Watergate trials led to Nixon's resignation, and a Ford Pardon, which in the end, spared the nation the demoralizing spectacle of a trial. Democrats didn't like being thwarted in their opportunity to make political hay out of the situation, and took a second swipe at the concept with Iran Contra. Unfortunately, that proved not to be particularly successful, from a political standpoint. It did, however, rile the Republican Party, which in turn, found an even more dubious point on which to Impeach Bill Clinton a few years later.

Each step in the process "one-upped" the political rhetoric between the parties, and has led us to the point where the Democrats seem more intent on political blood and perceived "justice" rather than a true debate on whether the idea of "Torture" is really one that will keep America safe.

2. Political Grandstanding--Building on the prior point's theme, we saw politicians such as Al Gore and Joe Biden use Iran Contra to build their own resumes. Likewise, Lindsey Graham and others tried to use the Impeachment trials to build their own profiles. Unfortunately, in each case, these people did nothing to actually enhance the debate, and in the end, people like Graham looked very hypocritical, calling for Bill Clinton's impeachment over lying to Federal Officials, while calling for Scooter Libby to be freed, since his offense was merely "lying" to Federal Officials. Such political debates have been extremely counterproductive, and in the end, wasted a lot of time and money.

3. National Embarrassment--Did we not suffer enough indignation and embarrassment over the OJ Simpson Trial, or the Impeachment hearings? Do we really need endless debates about whether some lawyer's definition of the word "interrogation" matches the text book definition in Webster's? Or in Patrick Leahy's dictionary?

4. Extenuating Circumstances--Can we really fault the Bush Administration for wanting to keep America safe? I don't advocate torture, and I don't believe that these techniques have kept us safe. But I am NOT ready to say, with the evidence we have seen thusfar, that there is sufficient evidence for a trial of Senior Bush leaders. Remember, after 9/11/01, we didn't really know the nature and extent of the threat al Queda and some of these captured suspects posed. The President is our protector in chief as well as our leader. I think we all would not have been happy if we had been attacked again. In such a position, I can't say I would have acted differently. With the benefit of 8 years of hindsight, it is far too easy to say that the Bush Administration acted outside of the law. But I do think extenuating circumstances mandate that to be prosecuted, there has to be ample evidence that the White House knowingly broke laws, circumvented protections, and did so without legal justification (sound or otherwise). I am sorry, but my bar for this is a little higher than simply pushing the envelope on "enhanced interrogation techniques"

New evidence of flagrant rule-breaking could change my mind. But I don't think we, as a nation, are in a position to have this debate and prosecution in a fair and unbiased fashion. I think Obama knows this is true, and he isn't prepared to go all in on this issue. Even independent prosecutors can end up being Kenneth Starr. Let's face it, if Obama decides to aggressively move ahead with this prosecution, and it turns out that there is evidence that such tactics tangibly stopped attacks, it could lead to a can of worms that blows up in his face. And if you think the media $#!^ storm is tough now, wait until Dick Cheney is sworn in to testify...

Get ready for ALL-NEWT, ALL THE TIME

Conservatives rejoice! Your savior has arrived! Actually, he's been here all along, but the time is ripe, and the Grand Old Party is on its knees. It's time for Candidate Newt Gingrich to lead his party back to prominence.

I can hear the nay-sayers now. "Gingrich!? That Guy? Didn't he shut down the whole federal government because Bill Clinton seated him in the back of Air Force One? Didn't he get bounced from leadership after he couldn't get Clinton removed from office? Didn't he have that whole thing with his ex-wife, serving her divorce papers while she was in the hospital with cancer?"

Yeah, that guy. He's back, and it's his time.

"But how can that be?" you may ask.

Really, it's far too obvious. Let's look at the laundry list of issues for the Republican Party, shall we?

1. Washington--The current Democratic President is very popular. The US Congress is controlled by the Democrats, which may not lead to rubber-stamping of legislative policy, but it does mean that the entire debate agenda is set and dictated by the triumvirate of Obama-Pelosi-Reid. Gone are the debates on flag-burning, immigration, Abortion rights, Welfare cuts, tax breaks, et al. The Democratic (more specifically, the Obama) agenda is health care, infrastructure, unions, education, energy, etc.

While the Democrats control the legislative agenda, and President Obama receives the lion's share of the television and journalistic media coverage, the strategy of the Republicans in Congress has been a miserable failure. Mitch McConnell and John Boehner look terrible on the talk shows and in the media, and Eric Cantor has thus far been less than stellar as the "up and comer" on the scene.

2. Former potential GOP candidates--watching Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee trying to stay relevant in the spotlight has just made us all cringe a little.

3. Republican Governors--The so-called "next generation" of Republican leaders, aka Republican Governors, have been a disappointment as well. Mark Sanford, how's that stimulus money working out? Bobby Jindal, perhaps 2012 is a little early for your entry into national politics. Tim Pawlenty, you're damned if you sign off on Al Franken's certification of victory, and damned if you don't. Sarah Palin? Jeez, do I need to go through the list of shortcomings?

4. Conservative Radio Commentators--If Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Mark Levin didn't already turn 65% of the country's stomachs, this whole "Tea Party" last week certainly didn't help. Fox's unabashed promotion of the event led to a whopping several hundred person march on Washington. In effect, most of the largest "events" across the country were turn outs to see Hannity, Beck, or others from the network, as much as anything else. And the notion that most of the people there were paying too much in taxes is not credible, since on that very day, most of those people saw a tax CUT in their paychecks for the first time in 6 years. Most of America stopped for a minute, scratched their heads, and kept going to work. So much for "going Galt"...

So getting back to my point, it's been a rough time of it for the ole GOP. But the stage is set for a return to prominence for Newt Gingrich. And here's why:

1. Age--Newt will be 69 years old in 2012. If he doesn't get back in the game soon, he will have that "age" albatross thrown around his neck for good. Candidates in their 70's rarely have success at the national level.

2. Media-Savvy--Certainly no one else in the Republican Party seems to have a clue how to talk to the Media. I blame this partly on the rise of Fox News and Conservative Talk Radio. For too long, Republicans have relied on these outlets to provide a media-friendly platform for their positions. Now that they are the minority party, the GOP has had to learn to play on the main-stream media turf, and it has proven to be a tremendous challenge for the current GOP leadership. Not so for Gingrich. Newt is a champion of the debate, and loves to mix it up on shows ranging from ABC This Week, to the Today Show. And he can do it in an intelligent way.

3. Stark policy differences--As long as George Bush was President, Newt had no real reason to be vocal on issues of domestic or foreign policy. As Obama has taken the reigns, and shown what his agenda priorities are, Gingrich has been able to provide a clear point of view about these positions. His next step is articulating a clear alternative.

I think Newt is waiting to see if the other GOP leaders in power can come up with something. But I don't think he'll wait long. I can see Newt coming up with an agenda to rival his "Contract with America" from 1994. If Newt can, I think he'd love to help the Conservatives return to power in the Congress in 2010 and then run for President on the back of that victory, to attempt to unseat Obama in 2012. Given the state of affairs in the GOP, it's not a pipe dream. And if the US Economy continues to sputter, or (heaven forbid) we suffer a set back of some sort in foreign policy, such a scenario could get good odds in Vegas.

Newt can see this too, and I think he will take this opportunity to hit the airwaves with an approach that is uniquely his. All Newt, All the time. Newt the Culture Warrior. Newt the Serious Leader. Newt the Responsible Economist. Newt the Foreign Policy Tough Guy. Can America handle President Newt?

We'll see...

Woe is Me? How will I ever survive the Obama Tax Hike?

I read a recent article in our local Sunday newspaper about some families that were just over the $250,000 threshold that the President used as his line, over which, to raise taxes. 'It just isn't fair', was the primary complaint amongst each of the families. 'I don't FEEL rich, why should I, or why should WE have to pay more?'

I guess if you don't FEEL rich, why should you have to pay anything at all, using that logic?

One woman, married with a couple of children, even went as far as to break down their monthly cash flows. '$250,000 isn't even that much money', this person was saying. 'After taxes, it's only, like, $12,000 a month. After retirement contributions, private schools, utilities, college savings, $1,200 a month tithing to our local church, and a $4,000 monthly home loan payment, it doesn't leave us much to spend. We aren't broke, but we aren't swimming in cash either...'

I am wondering if anyone reading this can spot the flaw in this logic (after getting over their righteous indignation!). Perhaps I can help this woman out a little here:

First of all, what the heck is a family of 4 doing with a $4,000/month mortgage payment? Even with taxes, that's a home debt burden over $500,000! I suppose earning $250,000 a year means that fiscal responsibility doesn't apply any more. Even if someone wants to buy such an extravagant home on this salary, I am not too interested in hearing the "woe is me" song that he or she is singing of over taxation. There are things called budgets. Most people have to live within them. The laws of economics still apply to us all, as we have been made painfully aware in recent times.

Second, being able to fund retirement, private school, college savings, full tithing and STILL having money left over each month is better than about 95% of the people out there.

Third, the person making exactly $250k isn't really paying an appreciable amount more in taxes. Even the person making, say, $300k is paying a whopping $1,500 more in taxes (the marginal rate increase to 36% from 33% on $50k) this year from last. That breaks down to a whopping $63/paycheck, which is a real burden on that $6,000 bi-monthly paycheck. Pardon me if NO ONE is shedding a tear for you.

I saw the phony baloney "outrage" that was conjured up about being over taxed in our society, in the form of the recent "Tea Parties" last Wednesday. Unfortunately, I didn't see too many people making over $250k at these rallies. Ironically, the other thing I saw on April 15th was my recent paycheck, which went UP by about $50! I got a tax cut (remember THAT!? People forget that 40% of that $787 Billion Stimulus Package was TAX CUTS). Surprisingly, I didn't see a lot of mention of that fact on the news reports.

Fighting government wasteful spending is a noble cause, and I wouldn't object to the goal of spending less and spending smarter. I believe John McCain has made a living on just this principle. But this notion that this "outrageous" tax code suddenly sprung to life on January 20th, 2009 is just silly. That government debt and deficit spending is happening reminds me of Captain Renault being "shocked that gambling is taking place" at Rick's Cafe in the movie "Casablanca".

Similarly, this notion that we should feel sorry for those making $250,000/month, because their tax increase may go up at the same rate as my children's monthly co-pay amounts, doesn't really sell with me. It's time for some newer arguments about overall tax policy. We've already heard the original far too many times.

Obama Foreign Policy--Rational or Dangerous?

A lot has been made of Barack Obama's supposed foreign policy "debacles" recently from the Right. But let's take a rational look at these supposed blunders. I am trying to find the poor judgement, or the true "setbacks" for the United States, and I keep coming back to the fact that our approach to the world has gotten more rational and the logic more sound. Here are my facts to support this conclusion:

1. Obama's speech to European Leaders (aka: The "America is Arrogant" speech)--upon listening to this entire speech the other day, I am confused as to the nature of the uproar in the Main Stream media. The Conservatives have already decided that Obama is a socialist anyway, and their rantings, from Charles Krauthammer's article, to Sean Hannity's grousing, are so myopic, and incomplete, as to render them useless to the debate. For the record, Obama did not call America Arrogant. And he made the point that both America and Europe have taken irrational positions against one another, like fighting children, and it was time to put such differences aside, in the face of a larger world struggle against terrorism and economic meltdown. Heaven forbid we actually try to work with our allies in the spirit of mutual respect. It seemed pretty rational to me, and an important first step towards stronger cooperation.

2. Obama's meeting with Medvedev--ditto to point 1. The Bush/Putin relationship had grown sour, and the Russians have started to revert to old positions of chest thumping. Additionally, their economy is in the tank, there is tremendous unrest there, and this can cause instability in Russian/American relations. This relationship has some ways to go to heal, but Obama's been reaching out, and starting the two nations down this path. Remind me what's wrong with this thinking?

3. Somali Pirate Hostage standoff--Let me get this straight. Obama's position was to order containment of the hostages, and to take them out if there was a clear line of sight, and the hostage appeared in danger. Yup, Newt was right! This clearly makes Obama look weak. Especially since the moves ACTUALLY WORKED, and we got our people home safely, the cargo to port, and killed, or captured the pirates responsible for this hijacking. Obama didn't turn this incident into the next middle east war, and actually raised the debate on the overall piracy issue to one where rational solutions are being debated rather than gunshots being fired. Seems pretty crazy to me.

4. Cuba Embargo Restrictions easing--At this point, 50 years after Castro has come to power, does ANYONE still think that containment and starving the people of this country is going to lead to regime change? Most of the Cubans living in Cuba at this point have never seen any form of government other than Castro. I am NOT suggesting that Castro has been a great leader, or that he should be supported. But allowing Cuban American families to see their loved ones, and (heaven forbid!) give them some money, and a way to communicate together on a regular basis? Dear LORD! What next? Will Castro take this opportunity to take over South America? Certainly at 82 years old, and with a huge free standing army, this is Castro's chance! After all, he pointed missiles at us in 1961! Maybe the Soviet Union can send him some more missiles to shoot at Florida!

It's rational, it's time. Let these people see their loved ones whenever they want to. I also kinda like the idea that Obama lifted the travel and money ban, but not the commerce ban. It's a first step, and now we can see if Castro will return the favor. If he doesn't, we can hold him up for the world to see that he is, as suspected, the real problem in the dealings.

So, after these recent events, I am still struggling to see why we think this new President is so dangerous on Foreign Policy. After all, we could have had John "we are all Georgians now" McCain at the helm, ready to engage in war in the Ukraine, and bombings in Iran. Imagine how he would have handled the Pirate situation.

We shall see whether all of these moves end up being sucker plays, or lead to better world relations. But I am willing to take the risk that doing what is rational and respectful is the best way to lay the groundwork for more decisive action, should it be necessary. It looks like President Obama is willing to take that risk as well.

Giving up on the GOP

I understand that political parties have platforms, agendas, and an ideological base to uphold. I also recognize that there are levels of devotion to ones ideology, and party, and that one can be ideological on single issues, a multitude of issues, or perhaps even NO issues at all. Sometimes individual character and leadership can inspire people to follow.

But at this point in time, I am troubled by the Conservative take-over of the Republican Party. It's been a long time coming, but now it seems as if this party is one bad election from dissolving and becoming the "Conservatives of America" party.

Gone are the Alan Simpsons (pro-choice leader), the Bob Doles (deal-cutter in chief), the Warren Rudmans, Lowell Weickers, John Chaffees (budget first, social issues last), etc. Former Conservatives like John McCain are now seen as too moderate for the "true believers". The party bows down before names like Goldwater and Reagan, even though Goldwater would cringe at what the party has become. People like George H. W. Bush and Howard Baker aren't even footnoted in the annals of Conservative vernacular.

And it's gotten worse. Republicans have put most of the federal judges and justices in place over the past 20 years, and yet there is a constant drumbeat about "activist judges" from the right. Apparently, these Republican-leaning judges are just too damn liberal for the country at large. Television shows on Fox News don't encourage real debate, but rather an affirmation of all things anti-Obama, anti-Liberal agenda, and Pro-Conservative. And Fox has been actively encouraging the politicization of all of its programming, even holding a Fox News/Football Sunday towards the end of the Presidential Election campaign. The ideologues on the Right are forcing people to choose sides.

And this is unfortunate. Because since Reagan, the Conservatives could force such issues, knowing they would win in a pointed choice between their views and a liberal alternative. It has made for great politics for about 20 years. Unfortunately, with political victory comes the mantle of having to actually govern, and put your ideas into practice. And Conservatives found it far more difficult to govern than to shout down ideas from the sidelines. Issues are far more complex in reality than they are on a 3 hour talk show. There are more opinions than the ones calling into the Sean Hannity show, and some of these "truths" that these shows take for granted turn out to be false (anyone remember the line, "we will be greeted as liberators"?).

Republicanism isn't dead, and neither is Conservatism. About 6 more months of a down economy, or a terrorist attack, and you may be amazed at how quickly the Democrats will be labeled "out of touch" by the main-stream media.

But the fact of the matter is, most people are not particularly ideological. They are practical (dare I say, "pragmatic"?), and will support solutions that make sense, and fit what they see in their every day lives.

Tax cutting as a religion doesn't make sense to people, especially after watching two tax cuts in the past decade lead to only larger deficits and a lethargic-at-best economy. Certainly no one got rich in the stock market in the past 15 years since the great "Republican Revolution" of 1994, and for all the talk about Conservative greatness on economic policy, it's hard to see the proof of such statements.

The masses don't tend to have unassailable positions on issues like the death penalty, immigration, gun rights, health care, or even foreign policy. What I mean is that they want each of these issues to be improved from where they stand today, and they have an opinion on the matter. But it isn't usually very strident. I think most Americans would favor a sensible immigration policy, or even health care for all, but can be relatively flexible on the means to achieve such an end. As long as the results are not too adverse to their current situation, hey, most of us will take a sensible position.

That used to be a point to start the conversation between Republicans and Democrats. That's no longer the case. Nowadays, if you aren't supporting the Conservative agenda on ALL of these points, NO EXCEPTIONS, you are not a REAL Conservative. Since the Conservatives dominate the Republican Party, once you disagree with Rush or Hannity, you either have to support the Democrat, or drop out of the debate entirely. As a recent caller to the Limbaugh show noted, he was "a McCain supporter, a Republican, and someone who has served his country," he didn't approve of the manner in which Rush was igniting what he perceived as hysteria about where the country was heading. Mr. Limbaugh simply labelled him "Not a Republican". He didn't fit Rush's definition of what a Republican should be, and so he was simply dismissed from the conversation.

This is an issue. With a party so bereft of leadership, people who should not be allowed anywhere near the dais are having their turn to really rally their troops. Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, and Rudy Giulianni have no place in the upper echelons of a major political party. Yet here they stand, primarily because each has a loyal political base, and a certain strident identification that does not allow for anything other than Conservative loyalty and backing.

Such behaviors tend to scare me a little, and to be honest, the people with such a fervent opinion about issues that they really have no deep expertise or experience with, shows that these are not free thinkers. These are people who will believe anything said to them by a radio talk show host.

By 2006, the majority of people had had just about enough of the yelling and the finger-pointing. By then, most people had been on the minority side of at least one of the issues of the Right, and decided that this was a party of demonization, rather than rational debate. Is it any wonder that when someone comes along and offers an honest policy debate (whether he delivers it or not is another matter for another article), that people will chose this over more of the same?

Sadly, the GOP has been going back to the well once more. They are hoping it is 1994 all over again, and that they can win on the backs of poor Democratic leadership, and shouting from the sidelines. They may get there, if the economy stays down for the next 15 months. But if it doesn't, the Republican Party may disappear, and a more dangerous, more strident group may emerge in its place. The Republican Party of fiscal discipline and common sense is gone. I am sad to say I never really knew it to begin with.

Stock Market Increases? Be Careful...

It's been a great few weeks, from a market standpoint. People have started to think that they have survived the worst of it, and that their retirement portfolios are on the road to recovery. Also, there has been a sobering reality that is starting to creep into the perception of the Democratic and Republican parties. The Left is beginning to realize that it's HARD to govern, and that the mere mention of the words "President Obama" don't translate into an immediate improvement of all of what ails us. The Right is coming to the realization that merely calling the opposition names and getting angry is NOT a plan to return to power. These realities stink, if one is a true partisan. But it is going to get worse before it all gets better. This optimism in the market? It cannot last. Here's why:

1. Unemployment continues to surge ahead--I understand that the stock market is a leading indicator, and unemployment is a lagging indicator. However, there does not appear to be any indication that employment cuts are abating. If anything, the cuts I have started to see recently are more focused in the services sector, with announcements at places like Law Firms and Consulting Services Companies. These are white collar jobs, and there are large salaries attached to those jobs. My hope is that my perception is NOT reality, but I need a positive month, where job losses drop down to the 300-400k level, before I begin to believe we have jumped the shark on this recession.

2. Auto Company Failures will sink the Midwest--It looks like President Obama has had enough with GM and Chrysler's failure to turn the corner on their business models. It may not be GM's fault that the economic realities are brutal to their company, but at this point, it may not matter. A Chapter 11 Bankruptcy (Re-organization) could turn into a Chapter 7 (Liquidation) if it isn't done properly. My concern is that the best case scenario would lead to hundreds of thousands of jobs lost. The worst case is upwards of 1-2 million jobs lost. The mid-west would be devastated. It isn't exactly the stuff of better stock prices.

3. The Chinese are contemplating life after the dollar--Joshua Cooper Ramo was a most compelling guest on Meet The Press today. He discussed the notion that in China, there has been immense pressure for the Chinese government to move on from the dollar. This type of shift of policy from the Chinese would lead to this concern: the lack of interest from the Chinese would mean that the Fed would need to get dollars into circulation through other means. Auctions could mean more US investors, which could generate more of the hyper-inflation situation we saw during the early 1980's. If the Chinese don't participate in buying US dollars, could there be failed auctions, like those recently in Britain? This would not be good for a government that has just made credit promises in the $8-12 Trillion range over the upcoming decade. This cannot be a positive sign for the stock and bond markets here either.

4. Earnings are only NOT as horrible as previously thought. They aren't better--How is the fact that earnings are lousy, but not as lousy as we thought, a basis for a climbing stock market? This reminds me of the absolutely TERRIBLE Ford Motor Company's recent marketing line, "Have you driven a Ford Lately?" The reason THAT tag line is so bad is that it basically assumes that we all have it in our heads that Fords are lousy, and that if we just "drive a Ford again," we might realize that NOW it isn't so bad after all.

In that vein, the mere fact that the world didn't end last quarter does NOT mean that Dow 10,000 or S&P 1,000 should be in our immediate sights. These markets sold off for a reason, and those reasons don't appear to have been solved. I am bracing for more losses on the averages, and I am just not seeing enough out there right now to endorse a further run up of stock prices right now. I am concerned we will see DOW 7,000 before we see DOW 9,000. Let's see how things pan out...