Recently in Politics Category

A Plumber's Life

| | Comments (0)
One of my favorite movies of all time, and definitely my favorite movie geared towards children is called A Bugs Life. In the film, a perpetual dreamer named Flik invents a device that harvests grain (Flik is an ant) that his colony must collect for the evil grasshoppers.

Flik does not seem to be very highly regarded by the rest of his colony at the start of the film. They are focused on collecting enough food to satisfy the grasshoppers so they can then begin to pick enough food for themselves to make it through the winter. Flik's fellow ants would rather do what is safe than risk using new methods to collect food. And so the colony is amused, at best, with Flik's attempts to do it faster.

What the rest of the ant colony does not understand is that what Flik is doing is not just about getting done quicker because he is lazy. Flik is sick of the tyranny of the grasshoppers and the fear that it instills in his fellow ants. Flik wants everyone in the colony to be more free and have a better life. Some would dare to call what Flick is doing the pursuit of a dream. I call it the American Dream.

Early on in the story Flik makes a mistake that causes him to end up face-to-face with the leader of the grasshoppers (appropriately named Hopper) as the entire ant colony looks on. In the face of Hopper Flik gets scared, clams up and steps back into line. The moment when Flik steps back is a sad moment in the film but it is only the beginning of the story.

Sometimes life imitates art. And this week life definitely imitated art when a plumber from Ohio stepped forward to challenge Presidential candidate Barack Obama on the question of taxes. The man now known as "Joe The Plumber" queried the Democratic candidate on his tax plan that would raise the liability for people and small businesses earning more than $250,000 per year. During the exchange Senator Obama mentions that a tax on higher earners serves to help others by spreading the wealth around. The comment from Obama represented a rare moment of candor in what has been a amazingly long campaign.

This is part II in a series of two posts that detail some of the more troubling associations of Presidential candidate Barack Obama. In my previous post I highlighted his relationships with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright and the activist group known as ACORN. 

Interestingly enough, in the day since I published the first post, news has broken that ACORN voter fraud may have occurred in yet another state. In what I hope is an isolated incident, a 7 year old girl has shown up on the voter registration rolls in Connecticut. The form that registered the girl to vote was fraudulently submitted by ACORN workers.

It is very clear that Senator Obama cultivated his associations with Wright and ACORN in order to gain acceptance and trust in the local community in Chicago. Entry into Chicago politics required further assistance and more money. Senator Obama was able to find the assistance he needed, financial and otherwise, via friendships with Tony Rezko and Bill Ayers.

Tony Rezko

Tony Rezko is a very powerful man in the world of Chicago politics with the ability to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for political campaigns. Tony Rezko has been a longtime friend and associate of Barack Obama. In a story published today by the Associated Press the link between Obama and Rezko is confirmed.

"Rezko also was friendly with Obama -- offering him a job when he finished law school, funding his earliest political campaigns and purchasing a lot next to his house."


Mr. Rezko did a little more than just purchase the lot next to Senator Obama's house. When Senator Obama purchased his million dollar mansion in the Hyde Park section of Chicago, the sale price was for $300,000 less than the asking price. The lot next door was purchased by Tony Rezko's wife at full asking price. Later on Senator Obama purchased a parcel of the lot next door back from Mrs. Rezko in order to expand his own yard. Call the situation what you like, but the whole deal looks like a favor. This favor occurred while Mr. Rezko was under investigation for the crimes he would eventually be convicted for.

Tony Rezko is now a convicted felon. He was convicted in June 2008 of fraud in attempting to get millions of dollars in kickbacks on state funded real estate deals. Tony Rezko is also a slumlord. And Barack Obama was connected to some of the housing deals whose costs were forced onto the backs of taxpayers when Mr. Rezko stopped making payments on the projects.

An investigation by the Chicago Sun-Times titled, "Obama and His Rezko Ties" makes the connection between Obama and Rezko's real estate deals.

"Obama was an attorney with a small Chicago law firm -- Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland -- that helped Rezmar get more than $43 million in government funding to rehab 15 of their 30 apartment buildings for the poor."

The same Sun-Times report also reveals that while residents of Rezko's buildings were freezing without heat in the winter of 1997, Tony Rezko somehow scraped up $1000 to donate to the campaign fund of a new State Senator named Barack Obama. 

Another report by the Sun-Times titled, "8 Things You Need To Know About Obama and Rezko," details a relationship between Obama and Rezko that lasted for years, long after everyone knew Tony Rezko was using state money to refurbish and then neglect Chicago housing for the poor for his own personal gain.

How could someone with good judgment maintain such a long relationship with an individual who not only wasted taxpayer money but also engaged in criminal behavior? How could a U.S. Senator do a real estate deal with a man under deep investigation for crimes that were well known in the Chicago community? It's a question of judgment. 

I think it's more accurate to say that it's a reflection of poor judgment by Senator Obama who aligned himself with a slumlord that wasted the state taxpayers money in order to forward his own political career. Senator Obama should have denounced Tony Rezko and demanded that he make restitution to the citizens of Rezko's slums as well as to the taxpayers of the state. Instead, after years of devastating results in Rezko's housing projects, Senator Obama allowed Rezko to raise funds for his campaign for U.S. Senate.

As always, Obama claims ignorance, telling the Chicago Sun-Times the following. 

"While I was a state senator, he had buildings in my district that apparently were not managed properly. I had no knowledge of that at the time.''

As a state Senator Barack Obama could not keep track of neglected housing projects in his own district. And now he wants people to believe that he can keep track of the entire United States. An even more troubling question is this one. What favors does Barack Obama owe to Tony Rezko? And what would a President Obama do to repay those favors?
Those who are very close to me know very well that I'm a person who adheres to very conservative political values. I believe in personal responsibility. I believe in smaller government that runs on a realistic budget. I believe in a strong national defense to deter our nation's enemies. I believe that unborn children have rights. I believe that it is better to teach a person than to give to a person. Those are just a few of my very strong core beliefs that guide my view on politics.

It should not come as a surprise to anyone who knows me that I support the John McCain - Sarah Palin ticket for President of the United States. I don't support Obama - Biden chiefly because I don't agree with them on any major issue. But I'm also moved by what I see as Senator Obama's blind ambition that has brought him to where he is today.

Senator Obama has indeed engineered an impressive ascent through American politics. From the streets of Chicago as a community organizer, to the State Senate of Illinois to the U.S. Senate. And now who knows? He may just be the next President of the United States. Senator Obama's ascent is an example of how the American dream is truly alive and well.

But now I dare to ask a question. Does the path to the American dream matter when evaluating a person's readiness for the highest office in the land. Should we only acknowledge the titles, Community Organizer, State Senator, U.S. Senator? Do we dare ask what good a person actually accomplished? Do we dare evaluate the ethics and beliefs of the individuals that helped Senator Obama get where his today? I think we should.

For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world, and forfeit his soul? 
- Mark 8:36

During his ascent through the ranks of Chicago politics Barack Obama associated himself with a roster of questionable individuals and organizations. These associations enabled Mr. Obama to more easily make the ascent he has made. These associations represent the establishment in Chicago politics. I profile these associations one-by-one below.
Is there anyone who can make a case that the video embedded below does not constitute a smoking gun in the case of the current credit market meltdown? Here we have calls for increase oversight on a quasi-government organization that was already known to have cooked the books.

A New York Times story on June 23, 2003 titled, "Fannie Mae's Accounting Finds Critics Of Its Own," states that, "Regulators, lawmakers and investors have battered Freddie Mac, the country's second-largest mortgage financier, since it fired its president two weeks ago, after the company said he failed to cooperate with an internal inquiry into its accounting."

The hearing shown below took place in 2004.


Perhaps this one should be filed under, things that make you go hmmm.

America Votes At The Box Office

| | Comments (0)
A few weeks ago I heard an interview with an author and screenwriter named Andrew Klavan. Mr. Klavan put forth a very interesting theory that I had never considered. Klavan was talking about how the new Batman film, The Dark Knight, contained a hidden metaphor related to George W. Bush.

Klavan's theory is a simple one. The Batman character in this most recent film is in fact modeled after our current President. I haven't seen the film but Klavan classifies the character in the movie as one who sacrifices his popularity in order to do what is necessary to fight evil. Klavan also takes note of the fact that films with similar themes (like 300) tend to do very well at the box office. 

I took a look at the U.S. box office numbers for The Dark Knight and 300. 300 grossed $210 million and The Dark Knight has grossed $514 million.I also found that Iron Man, a film directed by Jon Favreau (a known Republican) and starring Robert Downey Jr. (said to be a strong Conservative) has grossed $318 million to date.

I also checked on a few popular films that toe the Democrat party line with respect to the Iraq war to see how they fared at the box office.

Andrew Klavan makes an interesting point when it comes to the respective approaches of Democratic and Republican film makers. Democrats produce films that hit the issues head on. And Republicans wrap their films in allegory. Some would argue that the reason for the difference in box office take can be found in the fact that the Republican themed films are just simply more entertaining. 

Many people I know who have seen Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 disagreed with the premise of the film but found the film making approach to be an entertaining one. Fahrenheit 9/11 grossed $119 million at the domestic box office. Moore's next offering titled Sicko didn't fare as well, grossing $24 million at the U.S. box office. But Sicko still did better than the four anti-Iraq war movies mentioned above.

So if you wanted to make the case that people are buying into the entertainment value rather than the message you might have an argument. So why don't more Democratically oriented films go for more entertainment value. Perhaps the writers and directors are so serious that they just cant' help themselves.

I pondered writing about this topic for awhile but it wasn't till I saw the movie Juno on Friday night that I decided to do so. Juno is a very cute and heart warming film that has grossed $143 million in the United States. The movie features a very strong pro life message. The main character, Juno, is a high school age girl who gets pregnant and considers having an abortion.

Juno knows that she is too young and immature to raise a child. She actually goes to the abortion clinic. Once there she finds a friend from school picketing the clinic while shouting, "Your baby wants to be born." The scene painted inside the clinic is anything but a pretty one. Juno decides right there that she will not abort the baby.

I doubt that most people who watched the film Juno immediately thought that the movie was pushing a pro life message. But the fact is that the decision to keep the child to term was made very quickly without any resistance from friends or family to do otherwise. So I certainly feel that the performance of this film lends credence to Mr. Klavan's theory that the performance of Republican oriented films is an indicator of the true societal values in the U.S.

If this topic interests you I highly recommend that you watch this video where Mr. Klavan explains his beliefs on this topic.
The Gravina Island Bridge in Alaska, also known as "the bridge to nowhere" has suddenly become a central theme of late in the Presidential campaigns of Barack Obama and John McCain. The funny thing about it is that neither politician actually had a hand in the original project.

Talk of the bridge has been spurred by Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's assertion that she said "No" to the bridge and told Congress that "...if we want a bridge we'll build it ourselves." That's where the battle begins anew.

The backstory is that the bridge in question was used by McCain in 2005 as a symbol of wasteful spending on earmarks. Earmarks are federal funds targeted for use at the state level that are usually slipped into larger bills. As a result many earmarks get passed without having any connection to the legislation in a particular bill.

As the NY Times reports it via a story published on 12/17/2005 titled Two Bridges To Nowhere Tumble Down in Congress,  "Congressional Republicans decided Wednesday to take a legislative wrecking ball to two Alaskan bridge projects that had demolished the party's reputation for fiscal austerity." So the funding for the project was actually killed by Congress long before Gov. Palin took office in December of 2006, or was it?

The same NY Times story goes on to state that, "The change will not save the federal government any money. Instead, the $442 million will be turned over to the state with no strings attached, allowing lawmakers and the governor there to parcel it out for transportation projects as they see fit, including the bridges should they so choose." So the bridge project was still very much alive even after Congress had supposedly "killed" it.

The project and funding was still on the table when Governor Palin took office in December of 2006. The previous Governor had, in fact, received the earmark and set aside $113 million for the project. The word is that statements made during Gov. Palin's candidacy for Governor of Alaska indicated that she supported building the Gravina Island Bridge. An Op Ed article in the Juneau Empire dated 10/29/06 states that,  "Ketchikan will support Palin because of her support of the Gravina bridge." This indicates a good possibility that at one time Gov. Palin supported the project.

But something happened between October 2006 and early 2007 after Gov. Palin took office. A letter to the Editor of the Juneau Empire dated 02/15/07 states, "Charles Fedullo, Gov. Sarah Palin's press secretary, said there is no money in Palin's capital budget for the project at this time. Palin has common sense, that's why." Later in the year another story on the Gravina Island Bridge indicates, "In September, Palin ended work on the Gravina project, acknowledging that the state no longer had a way to pay for a project that would cost hundreds of millions of dollars." 

Who Said It?

| | Comments (0)

“I have a really interesting political point of view, and it’s not always something I say too loud at dinner tables here, but you can’t go from a $2,000-a-night suite at La Mirage to a penitentiary and really understand it and come out a liberal. You can’t. I wouldn’t wish that experience on anyone else, but it was very, very, very educational for me and has informed my proclivities and politics ever since.”

See here.

Candidates Use Speechwriters?

| | Comments (0)

The buzz from many media pundits after Governor Sarah Palin's successful speech last night was that she didn't right her speech. So the inference is that although the speech was excellent, the ideas and accomplishments weren't really Gov. Palin's because a speechwriter was involved. Could the members of the press who have advocated this position be more silly?

I guess it may be news to the many politicos who cover these campaigns that all Presidential campaigns employ speechwriters. Senator Obama's campaign employs three speechwriters as detailed in a January 20, 2008 article in the New York Times titled What Would Obama Say?

Mr. Favreau, or Favs, as everyone calls him, looks every bit his age, with a baby face and closely shorn stubble. And he leads a team of two other young speechwriters: 26-year-old Adam Frankel, who worked with John F. Kennedy’s adviser and speechwriter Theodore C. Sorensen on his memoirs, and Ben Rhodes, who, at 30, calls himself the “elder statesman” of the group and who helped write the Iraq Study Group report as an assistant to Lee H. Hamilton.

I just had to make this comparison between Alaska and Delaware with respect to the revenue supplied to the U.S. government from the energy industry. Because after all, Alaska is a "tiny" state.

In 2007 Federal Royalty Revenue from the State of Alaska totaled $68,310,417. In 2007 Federal Royalty Revenue from the State of Delaware totaled $0. The State of Illinois supplied $248,808 to the Federal Government.

The Last Eight Years

| | Comments (0)
There's a lot of talk in the Presidential campaigns about whether or not people are better off today then they were eight years ago. It depends on who you ask. Here's my answer.

I'm Better Off

I'm better off now than I was eight years ago. That assessment seems to be a popular measure of success for a particular party or President. I don't think that success in a person's life is necessarily directly attributable to decisions made by politicians. I've lived in a country with a Republican President, in states run largely by Democratic politicians. And for the last two years Congress has been controlled by Democrats. My life is affected in part by decisions made by members of both parties. But the decisions that have the greatest impact on my life are made by me.

The fact is that I have architected my life in such a way that I have minimal reliance on the government. I don't want or need the government to provide me health care, education or any other social assistance in my day-to-day life. I don't expect the government to save money so my children can go to college. I included health care costs in a monthly budget. I save money each month in education funds for both of my children and have done so since they were only a few months old. I look to the government to preserve and protect but not to provide.

Looking back on the last eight years I see that things today could have been a heck of a lot worse. After 9/11/2001 there was a lot of uncertainty. What would the U.S. do? How would we move forward? Could we move forward? Well we did move forward. The U.S. invaded Afghanistan and destroyed the Al Qaeda training camps. They should have been destroyed years earlier. Then the U.S. invaded Iraq and eliminated Saddam Hussein. This should have been taken care of during the first invasion of Iraq. 

The Iraq War

War is a terrible thing. But so is a failure to recognize who your sworn enemies are. During the 1990s the U.S. failed to recognize the major threat that Al Qaeda and the extreme fringes of Islam posed to the country. To quote Barack Obama's pastor and spiritual advisor Jeremiah Wright, "America's chickens have come home to roost." Indeed but not because anything we had done, but because of what we failed to do.

In many ways I feel that President Bush and his fellow leaders failed the country in their conduct of the war in Iraq. It seemed to me that the war was fought to appease the media and make us seem like a more compassionate country. Unfortunately the enemy is not compassionate and they took advantage of that fact to humiliate us and cause great harm to the decent people of Iraq. Mistakes are made in war and I also have to give credit to the people who were the architects of what has been a great turnaround via the strategy known as "the surge." 

I want the war in Iraq to be over. But I want it to be over via victory, not retreat. The surge has allowed a path out of Iraq that is compassionate, honorable and makes sense. You win wars by fighting, not sitting still. And now that our troops have been allowed to fight they are closer to completing the mission than ever before. So I remember that when many Democratic leaders thought (and said) the war was lost that John McCain fought for a change in strategy.

The Housing Crisis  

There are bubbles that occur in just about every decade in the modern era. The current situation with housing and mortgages is no different. Many people gambled on the run up in housing prices and many people lost. President Clinton had a bubble of his own with tech stocks in the late 1990s. The bubble burst in March of 2000. A lot of people lost a lot of money in that time. There was very little sympathy for the plight of these investors because the perception is that people who invest in stocks are all rich.

The reality is that new technology had opened the world of investing to the little guy and gal. And loads of personal wealth and retirement was tied up in stocks via mutual funds. There was plenty of pain to go around. Whose fault was it? I don't think it was President Clinton's fault. And I don't think that the housing bubble bursting is President Bush's fault. Individuals made decisions and some of those decisions were poor ones. I don't think that the purpose of the government is to guarantee success or prevent failure. We have now and should continue to have a free market for real estate in this country.

The end result of the housing bubble has had effects that are positive for some people and negative for others. The drop in housing prices has made a home truly affordable again to many people who had been priced out during the bubble years. Count me in to that category. I bought a house this summer that was unaffordable to me and my family at peak bubble prices. For some the effects have been very negative.

Many people bought homes with no money down on adjustable teaser rates and are now paying a higher price for their home due to higher interest rates.Others bought second and third homes as investments. Some took out equity lines in order to "tap into the equity" built up in their homes. Everyone who accepted these deals also took on a great deal of risk. Sometimes risk is rewarded and other times risk leads to negative consequences.

If you think that the government can (or should) protect you from market bubbles then you are in for a big surprise.You are the only one who can do that. Think before you take on a large amount of debt. Don't count and spend money that isn't in your hands. And don't believe it when people tell you that prices will always keep going up.

The Cost of Energy


Energy prices have increased greatly in the last few years. The price of gas is way up. The price of heating oil and natural gas are way up.This effects every American in a multitude of ways. Our standard of living and ability to compete economically are greatly reduced because everything is effected by the cost of energy. I felt the pinch personally when I was driving 55 miles each way to work for a year. Between gas and tolls I was spending almost $300 per month on commuting costs. We were also living in a rented house whose monthly oil bills were approaching $500 per month.

Even though these added costs spelled trouble for the budget I took action before and after prices skyrocketed to mitigate the issue. Knowing that we would be living in an out of the way area I purchased the most fuel efficient car that would meet my needs for a second car. My Honda Civic gets nearly 40 MPG on the highway. And when the heating oil bill got ridiculous I decided that we absolutely needed to move closer to my work and live in a house with natural gas heat. We've done that and our budget has several hundred dollars a month more to show for it.

I think that the government does need to take action in order to create better energy security for the country. I hope that the next President embraces the utilization of domestic oil and gas production as much as possible. But until that time I'm doing everything I can, including adjusting my lifestyle and reworking my budget, to make sure that the effects of rising energy cost don't torpedo my family's economic future.

I Have Hope

Barack Obama is selling "hope" and "change" as the reasons to vote for him for President. But I have hope no matter who is elected to Presidential office. And I know that I can effect change in my life if I work hard enough. That's why I decided to enroll in a part-time MBA program at night. I'm not waiting for the government to hand me a better future. I'm continuing my education and making an investment in myself that I think will pay off for my family.

The Next Eight Years


In the last eight years my salary has increased about 30%. I got married. My wife and I have two children. We have a great house that really suits us. I'm employed doing something that I am passionate about. This is the life that I have planned and this is the life that I am living. I counted on the government for none of it. And that's why I plan on being better off eight years from now no matter who gets elected President.

About this Archive

This page is a archive of recent entries in the Politics category.

Photos is the previous category.

Travel is the next category.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.