The Audacity of $500 Tennis Shoes and Obama's Managed Mediocrity

I remember driving down a country road in Hardy County once. We passed by a nondescript house with a nondescript truck in the front. My wife commented, "believe it or not, those are some of the richest people in this county."

In their time, whatever method they used to make their money, I imagine that the government did not spend a lot of time telling them how and how not to earn it. Obama plans to unveil a bewildering array of new taxes and regulations that will hamstring corporations and investors alike. The goal lies in reducing the dynamic nature of American capitalism and imposing Obama's dream of managed mediocrity.

Managed mediocrity means that most people have to learn to live in a less prosperous America. Why? Because Barack and Michelle Obama say so! No one should get rich off of good old fashioned risk and reward. That is just too American. And nobody ever accused the Obamas of being American. Perhaps they hold US citizenship, but their ideas do not come from the traditions of our country.

It all comes back to the shoes that Mrs. Obama wore to a charity event. Five hundred dollar sneakers. Only rich people can afford to spend so much on their feet, unless there is a crying medical need. I suppose they got rich in the approved liberal way, instead of the evil capitalist way, investing in companies and putting Americans to work.

In Obama's new America of Managed Mediocrity, we will not be able to achieve the nouveau riche dream of wearing $500 tennis shoes. Only rich liberals can do that.

Jeb Bush Is Right

Don't get me wrong. I do cherish and respect what President Reagan did for our party and our country. His ideas and his efforts gave America twenty-five years of prosperity. Had Clinton followed his foreign policy example, we may have seen a much more secure America as well.

It's time to move on. It really is.

I am not saying we should forget Ronald Reagan. We never forgot Abraham Lincoln or Dwight Eisenhower. We should do a lot more to remember William McKinley who was a stronger supporter of free markets than the more flamboyant Theodore Roosevelt. However he belongs to history now.

People my age and older will have a hard time with this. We lived through the 1970s and remember the misery. Ronald Reagan raised us from all of that and restored our country's position in the world. But we must remember that millions of voters were not even alive when he was president. To them, he is as unreachable as Lincoln, a picture in a history book instead of a living example. If we continue to venerate Reagan, we risk looking like the old Franklin Roosevelt stalwarts of the not too distant past. Who in West Virginia even in the 80s and 90s did not know at least one person who voted the straight Democratic ticket because of FDR?

The Republican Party must start searching for the next Reagan because America will need some renewing in 2012. Obama has deconstructed much of our economic and diplomatic position in a shockingly short amount of time. Who will be the Republican to inspire this generation? Where will the ideas that wil shape the 21st Century come from? Hopefully we see one emerge soon.

Do not forget the past, but do not let the past blind us to the present or the future.

****************************************************************************

Remember when we said on this blog that Ford Motor Company will not only be fine, but end up in a strong position when this economy shakes out?

Ford just leapt over Toyota to once again seize second place in US auto sales last month. Ford's new midsized Fusion is a hit with consumers and recreates the success enjoyed by that company in the 1990s with the unspectacular, but dependable Taurus.

General (soon to be renamed "Government?") Motors is still the nation's best selling company, but they and Toyota both lost market share to the aggressive and still completely private sector Ford Motor Company.

To be honest I still think GM should be split into two if not three parts. Chevrolet and Cadillac would probably prosper alone.

Kudos to Ford!

Nixonian Foreign Policy and Obama

A couple of days ago, I described Hillary Clinton's foreign policy as being that of Richard Nixon and the more I thought about it, the more I felt that point needed clarification.

Nixon's main achievements came in the field of foreign policy. Lyndon Johnson's tax and spend approach to welfare combined with his mismanagement of the Vietnam War led to a period of American weakness. High inflation, breakdowns of social cohesion, and a declining ability to project power meant that by the late 60s, that weakness was real. Nixon adjusted US policy accordingly. For the first time since World War II, we dealt from a position of weakness rather than one of strength. This required Nixon, more so than other presidents, to engage enemies with despicable domestic records. Mao Tse Dong was the worst of the lot. However, Nixon did this with an overall vision of m,aking our enemies (USSR and China) more afraid of each other than of us. It worked, giving us breathing room before the American Renaissance of Ronald Reagan.

Obama has insisted that we show disrespect to our friends and love to our enemies (who use the opportunity to slap us in the face when they get the chance.) It is the Nixon concept of engaging enemies, without the overall plan of how to use that engagement to secure security. What is most galling is that at the end of 2008 the United States was the most secure and strongest power in the world. Obama's excessive borrowing has placed us at the mercy of our adversaries. His policy of apologizing for every slight, real or imagined, has dissolved the international respect so carefully established by Bush and Rice.

So a point of clarification. I used Nixon to describe Clinton and Obama's policy because liberals believe that Nixon is worse than Hitler and Judas Iscariot rolled into one. However it does use some aspects of Nixon's process without the overall vision or savvy that will lead to an enhanced American security.

WVGOP announces Underwood internships for 2009

CHARLESTON – Five participants in the West Virginia Republican Party’s new Cecil H. Underwood Intern Program have been announced today, including four college students and one high school student.

The program participants are:

* Patrick Heavner, a freshman accounting major at Marietta College and originally from Mineral Wells. He has volunteered on several local West Virginia campaigns and is the secretary for the Wood County Young Republicans. He wants to build the WVGOP team through engagement at the grassroots level.

* Micalyn Kuhl, a senior political science major at Marshall University. Originally from Elizabeth, Micalyn served as a Herndon Fellow working with the legislature and Secretary of State’s office. She believes interning with the party will allow her to gain valuable experience as she pursues a graduate degree in policy research, and help the future of the state.

* Scott Robertson, a junior political science major attending Marshall University. Originally from Man, Scott is the president of Marshall College Republicans. He wants to intern because he believes the WVGOP is the only party that will stand up for hardworking people and spur economic development in the state.

* Nina Orndorff, a graduate student at West Virginia University pursuing a degree in Public Administration. Hailing from Buckhannon, Nina has served as a Burke Intern with the West Virginia Legislature. In the face of economic uncertainty, she believes now is the perfect time for our party to grow its presence and lead the way to bettering the state.

* Ben Adams, a junior at Capital High School in Charleston. Ben has interned with the Pennsylvania Republican Party and extensively with the West Virginia McCain ‘08 campaign. Ben believes that the Republican ideals are the best vehicle to change government and wants to be part of the process.

The day to day operation of the program will be overseen by Shane Wilson, a graduate of Washington & Lee University in Virginia, who is preparing for law school at West Virginia University this fall. Shane has recently worked in the office of the Secretary of State.

“We’re excited about the new intern program and the valuable experience that will be gained by these bright young Republican activists over the course of the summer,” said state GOP Chairman Doug McKinney. “We appreciate everyone who applied for the program, and our hope is that in future years, we can expand its reach to include even more young people who exhibit such pride in their communities and a desire to make their state a better place to live.”

McKinney said the intern program will provide logistical and ground support for the party, grow new ideas and talent with potential future leaders and party staff, and publicly demonstrate an active, growing, and community-oriented party. Interns will develop conservative values and leadership skills, and gain valuable work experience and interaction with party and community leaders.

The program is named in honor of former Governor Cecil H. Underwood, who first ventured into politics in 1944 at age twenty-two with his election to the House of Delegates. He retained this seat until 1956, serving as House minority floor leader in 1949, 1951, 1953, and 1955. In 1957, he became the youngest governor in the history of the state and the first Republican governor in twenty-four years. In 1996, Underwood became the state's oldest governor, forty years after his first election to the office.

Enact a Constitutional Amendment Now to Democratize Planning and Health Boards

It is time for the West Virginia Legislature to consider an amendment either making various health, economic development, and other planning commissions elected, or strip them of their power to enact law.

Rule of law is the most important guarantor of democracy. In a free society, laws are made by representatives of the people. They are strictly written and enforced consistently. One example of where rule of law breaks down is when government organs seek to perpetuate themselves and enhance their powers.

The 20th century brought with it occasional manic periods of planning. These often followed years of tremendous expansion that ended with the inevitable corrections that caught the poorly prepared off guard. Planners seek to regulate development and growth to fit their vision of what is proper and appropriate. To achieve their goals, they often require sweeping legal mandates enabling them to do what they feel is right and proper. This removes certain aspects of regulation from the legislative and places it in unelected bodies, thus undermining the democratic ideal of rule of law. Local planning agencies, such as the health departments, enact legislation routinely that affect large numbers of people and businesses. Why do unelected boards have such power?

A multiplicity of laws or a vague legal code affects rule of law in adverse ways as well. Individuals or businesses can find their freedom to act hampered by a bewildering array of regulations that even the most observant may find themselves violating. When the government enacts vague, badly written, or inconsistently enforced laws, this also enhances the confusion. At this point the government becomes the arbiter, the main source of guidance, and the enforcement arm. This grants it extraordinary power as well as the ability to act in arbitrary ways. The United States tax code, enforced by the Internal Revenue Service, remains a prime example of a system whose complexity breeds fear of the government among law abiding citizens that ought to be considered unnatural in a free society, not a part of doing business. At both the federal and state level, the tax code has been used to harass law abiding opponents of the party in power. How much simpler would life be if we maintained the simple, restrained ideal of government originally created!

Real economic education in the schools would prevent much of the pain caused by such periods, but many would rather just blame capitalism itself and beg the government’s assistance.

In short, planning undermines rule of law, expands the power of unelected authorities, and diminishes freedom. It is time to democratize the process.

You're most likely part of the Militia

This is the current US Law without commentary.

Title 10, Subtitle A, Part I, Chapter § 311

§ 311. Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are—

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

Pirates Take on Capitalism and Lose While Democrats Admit That Cap and Trade Is Really a Substantial New Tax

Pirates attempted to attack an Italian cruise liner named Melody and came away singing some sour notes.

Far be it for BBC or other news networks to report this, but the attack was thwarted by an Israeli security team hired to protect the liner and passengers. It shows that what is actually a low grade threat perpetrated by low rent thugs can be handled in a sophisticated and effective manner by trained private sector professionals.

****************************************************************************

Meanwhile even Democrats from states with manufacturing and mining interests continue to criticize the Obama Administration's continued push towards cap and trade regulations. They could not get it past Congress, so they had the EPA declare that climate change was a threat to the nation so the executive branch could enact it anyway.

Congress must step up to prevent the administration from rendering them powerless on an issue that will damage the economy and destroy jobs. Especially as global warming advocates have been disappearing fairly quickly as of late.

Representative John Dingell, Democrat from Michigan, fired away at Obama's enviromunists by saying "Nobody in this country realizes that cap and trade is a tax - and it's a great big one."

Where will our congressmen and women stand on this? We know that Capito and Byrd have stood up for their West Virginia constituents on this issue. How about the rest of them?

Blast from the Past: No more Kings