The Natural
Did anyone else see Obama's NAACP convention speech a few nights ago? A couple of cable news channels carried it live. If you missed it, I encourage you to check it out (it's posted on YouTube and elsewhere). Politics and policy aside, this really is one of the great orators of our time. After you watch the speech, watch the tape of Sarah Palin announcing her resignation...
posted by The Cunning Realist at Saturday, July 18, 2009
13 Comments:
yes - it was a great speech - lots of good stuff well said - but he hit the responsibility issue really well and I think maybe it takes a bit of courage - at least honesty - to take that message to that audience - no pandering there.
There's no question that as a rhetorician he's the most talented speaker since JFK, and that's no small thing.
But as a leader? It's still very early, but it's fair to say that his actions to date have been extremely timid. On the issue of the day, the economy, his appointees have been all insiders - team players who were on the team that made our mess. We're in Iraq for at least two more years - the blood staunched (not stopped) but still freely hemorrhaging money. Obama's Afghanistan policy would not have been unwelcome in the Bush White House.
There's an old baseball term - good field, no hit. It was what a scout would note about a minor leaguer who was never going to the majors. I'm beginning to wonder if it might be applicable to Obama.
He'd be more credible about responsibility if he weren't currently transferring trillions of taxpayer dollars to his friends on Wall Street.
He can be the greatest orator in history and do most things right, however if he fails to understand that he has placed his trust in the wrong financial advisors and the magnitude of the "credit bubble", they will all be footnotes. If he does understand what his advisors are doing, now that is another matter.....and one that he better hope the sheep do not come to understand.
ALOHA!!
I buy into the concept that actions speak louder than words.
When I want to assess how a President and his Congress are performing I go straight to the US TREASURY DAILY STATEMENT and the US TAX REVENUES CHARTS.
The US TAX REVENUES started breaking down in Q4 2008 and each quarter since has been much worse than the prior one until now we are starring at 20% negative revenue growth rates. If our government measured Unemployment like we did back in 1994(U7) then the Unemployment rate would be 21% right now. I cannot speak for everyone else here, but it is my observation that never in my life have I known so many unemployed or underemployed friends and relatives and acquaintances. In the midst of all this economic mayhem we have a President who brags about creating 150,000 jobs and his tax evading Tres Sec who, like a parrot, keeps squawking STRONG DOLLAR ... STRONG DOLLAR! To the point where now his stand-up act is openly laughed at in Beijing Improv.
Lets just look at Defense/War spending, as one line item on the US TREASURY DAILY STATEMENT. If you compare George Bush to Obama you get this for FY Q3 results:
Bush-Height of Iraq War(right after Shock & Awe)Q3 FY2003 - $150BIL USD
Obama-No invasion Q3 FY2009 -$284BIL USD
Obama is outspending Bush on military expenditures nearly double, yet this man made campaign promises to bring the troops home.
There is not enough room here for me to list the moral and fiscal atrocities being committed by the Obama regime. This is not me talking ... this is Obama's own US TREASURY DEPT talking, via their own daily financial reports! Something I doubt Obama ever mentions in his speeches to the NAACP, as he lecturing others on "responsibility" and "courage". Perhaps he needs to actually read his own words some day ... We can only HOPE!
IT IS WHAT IT IS ...
After you watch the speech, watch the tape of Sarah Palin announcing her resignation...uhhh, I get your point, but, no thank you...
He gives good word.
Kaimu,
When are you getting your own blog?
Kaimu, you might be comparing apple and oranges with the Bush-Obama defense budgets. As I recall Bush did not include Iraq War expenditures in his Defense budgets. (They were off-budget.) As part of Obama's transparency agenda he includes the Iraq War expenses in the Defense budget. We're still spending far, far too much on "Defense"--more than the next 9 largest spenders combined, even not counting the wars!--but Obama isn't quite so bad on this particular issue as it seems.
ALOHA !!
am4 ...
No, the line item I refer to on the US TREASURY DAILY STATEMENT is strictly Defense Vendors only, no other military costs are included. There are separate line items for military personnel and deployment costs. In other words this is strictly the equipment and weaponry of War. Payments to Lockheed, to General Dynamics, etc.
In actuality you are comparing apples to oranges as the US TREASURY DAILY STATEMENT shows "actual" receipts and outlays on a daily basis. In layman's terms its equal to your checkbook ledger only the balances at the end of the day for the US TREASURY are all in trillions! HA!! You refer to a BUDGET.
Can anyone here even count to 1 trillion? I think that whatever person we elect as President after Obama should only be allowed to spend as high as they can count ...
Luckily that wasn't a law when George Bush was in office otherwise all he could have spent was $20 for fingers and toes. Well, maybe $40 since Cheney has 10 fingers and 10 toes ... Well, maybe $60 since Karl Rove has 10 fingers and ... oops ... sorry he only has 3 toes on each leg ... so the most they could spend would have been $56! The more barriers to spending in DC the better our kids lives will be!
So were into the trillions now. Budgets that once were denominated in billions not that long ago are now TRILLIONS! So where do we as US citizens allow this to end ... QUADRILLIONS? Isn't it obvious by now that the only people on Earth who can stop WASHINGTON DC from self destructing is ... us? Just us ... Really waiting for Obama to CHANGE is Waiting For Godot, so what's left for Americans is for "us" to CHANGE instead. Politicians haven't changed since the Greeks and Romans. Asking politicians to CHANGE is like asking humans to discard their ego. It has never happened in the past and will never happen in the future. Its very simple ... OBAMA IS NOT ONE OF US! HE NEVER WAS AND HE NEVER WILL BE. That was just so he could get elected. As I have said before politicians are only experts at getting elected. Somehow, whenever normal sane people get into a voting booth they all of a sudden believe in free lunches, the tooth fairy and Santa Claus again.
ES QUE LO ES ...
Kaimu,
The Iraq War began on March 20, 2003--the end of 2Q of that fiscal year. So the 2003F YTD 3Q included only one quarter of war, as opposed to 2009F YTD 3Q which includes 3 quarters of war. And if these expenses do not increase while the nation is at war, why did you note that Bush's expenses were at the "height" (your word) of the Iraq War and Obama's were "no invasion"?
ALOHA !!
The "height" of spending for the invasion and occupation is when the military is mobilized and moved thousands of miles to the theater of War, in this case Iraq. Remember SHOCK & AWE? How many bombs dropped? Almost every American saw it all on TV. Remember the US military fuel convoys that were being blown up every night on TV? Remember seeing all those C-130s and Galaxies flying in supplies non-stop? Remember Blackwater? All that costs money ...
It used to be in past wars, like the Civil War, where battles drew spectators on the hillsides. Now we just sit in the comfort of our own living room and watch death and destruction 24/7 on CNN.
You can use whatever quarter you want to use, I chose the quarter after SHOCK & AWE. Yet it does not matter what quarter I choose as Obama has spent way more than Bush on Defense, according to the US TREASURY'S own financial statement. If you doubt that then talk to the US Treasury. I only point out the vast difference between Bush and Obama regarding the Defense Vendor line item outlays.
As a comparison in 1945 the "height" of WW2, FDR was at a SPEND RATE of 2.05, meaning for every dollar he received in War Bonds and taxes he spent $2.05. Will you agree that WW2 was costly, since it was a World War? The Obama regime SPEND RATE right now is 5.88, for every dollar Obama receives via taxes and other Debt issue and IOus he spends $5.88. That is way more than twice what FDR was spending on WW2 and remember we practically lost our entire Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor, talk about a handicap.
The sad truth is that over the decades the US government has been making too many promises and guarantees, what I call "embedded welfare". The cost of that embedded welfare puts this country at a huge disadvantage, especially during a state of War.
There is no doubt that Bush & Cheney are the quintessential WAR HAWKS, something I find astounding for two Vietnam War draft dodgers, but on the other hand Obama & Biden are in no way the Purveyors of Peace and Love either ... Just ask any Afghan or Pakistani?
The real issue is that we should have never gone to Iraq, just based on COST alone. If you recall, then Treasury Secretary O'Neill, openly challenged the Bush regime's estimate that the Iraq War would only cost $1.78BIL USD. For challenging the President O'Neill was fired by Bush. Never mind the WMD issues or any other issue ... COST alone should have dictated a NO GO!
Why don't you ask Obama why he is spending so much on Defense? Is he building up the US military for some reason we have yet to know about? I know he isn't just spending $302BIL USD(as of July 20)just for fun!
I would assume that $9.7TRIL USD worth of outlays and IOUs are for something. I personally have yet to see a dime and I even pay taxes!
Hummmmm???
Mahalo ...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Post a Comment
<< Home