The economy is trying to bounce back but is weighted down by so much uncertainty about what Washington is doing, going to do,  and in some cases has already done, (e.g. health care) that it can’t do more than sputter.  Unemployment is still near 10 percent and would be even worse except for those that have given up.   Deficits have risen to heretofore unimaginable heights.   Last year this was explained away as TARP and the various stimulus plans, but this year’s deficit is even larger without them.

With a whole slew of tax increases slated to kick in (the new tax on tanning salons just took effect this month) the economist Arthur Laffer wrote in the Wall Street Journal that a lot of the growth we see now is from economic activity moved forward in an attempt to avoid next year’s tax increases.  Laffer predicts that next year “the train goes off the tracks and we get our worst nightmare of a severe ‘double dip’ recession.”   

Then there is the Obama administration’s handling of the oil spill that makes the Bush administration’s handling of Katrina look to be a model of speed and efficiency.   On the foreign policy front, foreign leaders might like Obama because he bows to them both literally and metaphorically, but we are hardly more respected, nor is the world a safer place.

While major media, his stalwart defenders,  are valiantly attempting to present things in the best light and deflect all criticism, there have even been a few cracks in their ranks.

Everywhere you look things are bad and getting worse.  While finger pointing at Bush remains a major component of Obama speeches, as the months tick by, it becomes less and less effective.  Blame may be of supreme importance in Washington, but in the rest of the country people just want the problems fixed.

So what went wrong?  Hugh Hewitt thinks that it has to do with:  “oiiohh” or “Obama Is In Over His Head.”  There is a lot of truth in that.  One of the things the country is learning from the Obama presidency is that having chief executive experience does in fact matter.  The presidency is more than meetings, breakout sessions, and speeches.   With all the left’s attacks on Sarah Palin, the simple fact is that, as a successful governor, she had more experience than Obama.  Obama was really nothing more than a state senator and community organizer who, because of a botched campaign where his opponent had to drop out, got to the United States Senate.  Once there, he almost immediately began running for president.  His lack of experience is a factor and he does at times seem in over his head. But I think there is a deeper problem.

One of my various jobs while working my way through school was as a bank alarm installer and on one job I was part of a team changing the alarm system of a major Los Angeles bank.  Not only was it a major bank, this was the first time this new alarm system was being installed so things had to go right. But they didn’t.  The new system did not work.

For a couple of days my team leader spent hours on the phone with the engineers trying to get the new system to work, but to no avail. Since we had had to rip out all the old cabling to put in the new alarm, going back the old system was not an option. The bank was getting upset, and the head office pressing us to “just make it work.”

Since the bank alarm was somewhat similar to something I had worked on in the Air Force, I asked my lead if I could take a look at the schematics.  In about two hours I found the problem.  They had been checking, rechecking, and then checking again to make sure they followed the schematics, but the schematics were wrong.   Once we confirmed this with the engineers, we rewired the alarm to the corrected schematics and it worked perfectly.

The problem we had at that bank is similar to Obama’s problem. His schematic of how the country works is wrong.   During the campaign his supporters in the media told us not to pay attention to his past or those around him, but we should have. After all, no one spends twenty years in a church with a pastor like Jeremiah Wright unless there is some agreement there.

Obama’s schematic, or “blueprints” for the country have been formed by his life experience and the elite schools he attended,   influenced by the writing of radicals like Saul Alinsky,  focused by his work as a community organizer, and then seasoned by his friends such Pastor Wright and Bill Ayers, the sixties radical who bombed the Pentagon.   In short, his blueprint for the country is wrong.  The more he tries to “fix” the country using those blueprints, the more he will fail and the worse things will get.

While it is theoretically possible for Obama to realize his blueprint is wrong, even in normal circumstances this is very difficult.  For Obama it is virtually impossible,  for no other reason than that his blueprint is supported and reinforced by many others in his party and in the media.  Psychologically it is much easier for them to simply blame Bush than to confront their own failings.

The only real solution is to stop the bleeding by changing control of at least the House of Representatives in November.  If we add to this control of the Senate, then some minor corrections can be made.  But any real solution will have to wait until 2013 when a new president, one with correct blueprints, can take office.

Entire Review

Tom could see the approaching storm that would become WWII and mentioned this in his letters home. He wrote of how they had received a shipment of fighters, but that they were in crates and needed to be assembled. They were still assembling them when the war started on December 7,1941. The Japanese invaded the Philippines the next day. Tom and the rest of the troops, along with their Filipino allies, fought valiantly. With their base destroyed they, retreated to Bataan.

Roosevelt promised reinforcements, so they struggled to hold out till they arrived. In March Roosevelt ordered MacArthur to leave and go to Australia. Tom and the rest of those left behind continued to fight on, till they could be reinforced. But in the end, there was no way to win. The promised reinforcements were never sent; food and ammunition ran out; and the Japanese force was too strong. Yet still they fought to hold out. Then their positions were overrun, and on April 10, 1942, exhausted, starving, wounded and sick (most had malaria and/or dysentery), they surrendered.

But as horrible as their ordeal had been, the worst was yet to come. The Japanese commander had ordered provisions be set aside for the expected 25,000 prisoners. But he was unaware that the real number of captured Americans and Filipinos was more than 75,000. Nor was he aware of just how bad their condition was. They had held out as long as possible and so when they did surrender were in very bad shape. In short the provisions he ordered to be set aside were nowhere near what was needed, and the Japanese army command structure did not allow for questioning orders, even to correct mistakes in information.

To make matters worse the Japanese viewed surrender, whatever the circumstances, as a dishonor. Thus it did not matter how valiantly they fought, how long they had held out, or how low they had been on food and ammunition, they had surrendered and did not deserve to be treated honorably. Since there were not  enough trucks to transport all the them,  what came to be called the Bataan Death March began.

Tom was not one of the lucky few whose guards, realizing how inhumane the situation was, just let their captives go. Even though he was sick, he was forced to march the 30 miles in the blazing hot sun to the rail center. Most had no food or water for the march. There was no stopping, and many were beaten. Many just died on the road; others were shot if they did not keep up. If Tom was fortunate, he would have still had shoes. Many didn’t and their feet burned as they walked on the hot asphalt as it baked under the sun. At the rail head in San Fernando Tom and other prisoners were pushed into a rail car with.

Because of the large numbers of prisoners, they were packed in as tightly as possible and in the hot sun, the metal walls of the cars burned unprotected skin. Many lost consciousness from the sweltering heat of the boxcars.   Others suffocated in the cramped space.  Yet they were packed in so tightly, the unconscious and the dead remained standing until the cars were unloaded at Capas.

Tom survived the trip to Capas.  From there Tom was once again forced to march the last eight miles to Camp O’Donnell. Suffering from sickness, starvation, and exhaustion, Tom only lasted five days in Camp O’Donnell, dying on May 18th, 1942. He was 22 years old. Later Private Thomas A. Hushbeck would be posthumously awarded a Purple Heart.

When people ask me what Memorial Day means to me, I think of my Uncle Tom, even though he died thirteen years before I was born. For me it is his holiday, but not his alone. There were the eight who died on Lexington Green in that first engagement of the Revolutionary war, and all the others who came after them to secure our independence, along with those who gave their lives in the War of 1812, the Civil War, the Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, The Vietnam War, Gulf War I and now the war on Terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq, just to name the major conflicts.

Whenever there was a need, Americans like my uncle Tom have step forward, knowing what may happen. Like my Uncle Tom, many have paid the ultimate price, so that we can live in freedom. Many may consider “Freedom is not Free” a cliché, just another slogan for a bumper sticker, but the cost of our freedom was paid by my Uncle Tom, and all the others who have in the past, or will in the future give their lives in defense of this country. It is for them that we fly the flag on this day. It is because of them we can enjoy the time off and relax on this day. They have given all that they had, and suffered in ways we can never imagine so that we might live in freedom. So while I enjoy the day, I will remember them. For they deserved to be honored. and remembered.

I write to ask that you stand for the constitution and vote against Obama-care.  You may think that if the bill passes, the issue will fade away, but if that is what you think you are wrong.

If the bill becomes law, the opposition will only grow, especially as more and more details of the bill come out, as will the details of the deals made to get it passed. The battle to keep it from passing, will become the battle to have it repealed. Blocking the implementation of Obama Care will be the central issue for the election in 2010, and then its repeal will be a major issue in 2012.

If it passes with your support, I will do as much as I can to support your opponent. I will do as much as I can to support efforts to challenge the bill in the courts. And I will do as much as I can to support efforts to have the bill repealed.

Vote against Obama-care.

If it passes, that will not be the end of the process as many Democrats hope. Rather, it will be the beginning of an even larger conflict; a conflict that will last at a minimum well into 2013. If it passes, the bill will have been passed against the clear will of the majority of the public and by means that are at best highly questionable, and probably flat out unconstitutional.  Regardless of what any court will rule in the numerous lawsuits that are already being planned, the process will be seen by most people as a subverting of the democratic system of government in order to get around the will of the people.

At the end of the movie Tora, Tora, Tora, dealing with the successful attack on Pearl Harbor, Yamamoto, the Japanese admiral says, “I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.”  While it is doubtful that Yamamoto actually said those words, they accurately describe the American people’s reaction to the attack.

 What Obama’s Ahab-like obsession in pursuit of health care has done is to once again awakened the American people and the passage of the bill will likewise fill them with a terrible resolve.  I do not pretend to know how that resolve will manifest itself, but it will manifest itself. It is for this reason that I am sure that when all is said and done, Obama-care will not survive. This is still a government of, by and for the people, and the people will not be ignored. The only question that remains is while Obama may be obsessed like Ahab, will the Democratic Party become the Pequod Party?

This will be paid for with a record $1.56 Trillion deficit, which in and of itself should be a cause of great concern.  Just a few short years ago Democrats were warning us of the dangers of deficits 1/10 this size.  One could have a serious debate over whether the government could safely handled the pre-Obama level deficits, but not deficits at these levels, which risk currency collapse and hyper-inflation. 

So while people are struggling, the best case scenario is that they will have to tighten their belts even more so government can live large at our expense.  As for the worst case, well, let’s hope it is only the best case…

It is hard to believe that only a few short years ago democrats were railing about the deficit spending under George W Bush.  Personally, I and many other conservatives agreed with them, and excessive spending was a significant factor in the Republican’s loss of Congress in 2006.  But while we agreed that spending under Bush and the Republican Congress was excessive, it was still hard to take the Democrat’s complaints seriously. After all, many conservatives characterized the Republican spending as Republicans acting like Democrats.  I was firmly convinced that if the Democrats regained control, spending and therefore deficits would go up, not down.

Still in my wildest dreams, or nightmares,  I did not imagine the deficits would rise to the levels they are now.  I thought they might go up some, maybe 10% – 50%, but never did I imagine they would go up 3-4 times.  Last year’s budget deficit was 1.42 trillion, This year’s is projected to be 1.35 trillion.  That is $4,500 for every man woman and child in the country, and that is just one year.  That means in just the last two years the Federal government has saddled the average family of four with over $36,000 in debt.  

This just cannot go on.  Even if the President’s projections hold up, after 5 years the deficit will still be $480 billion, well above the norm that Democrats were railing against  just a few short years ago.  But some budget experts see Obama’s projections as wildly optimistic and “most budget experts see deficits nearing or exceeding $1 trillion each year over the next decade once tax cuts and other policies are factored in.”

The cost just to service this rapidly growing debt is likewise growing. Combine this with the fact that within a few years the surplus generated by Medicare and Social Security will change to a deficit, and the Federal Government will have to start redeeming all those IOUs it has been filing away and there is going to be a huge money crunch.

Future Presidents and Congresses will not really have a choice but to drastically scale back or even eliminate a whole range of federal programs.  Sure they can, and undoubtedly will, raise taxes, and a lot.  But taxes depress the economy and thus there is a limit to how much money can be raised.  

Programs such as the National Endowment for Arts and Public Broadcasting are sure to go.  There simply will not be enough money.  But those will be just some of the visible casualties.  There are hundreds and probably thousands of smaller programs buried in the budget that are also certain to go, scarified to feed the ever growing debt.  Even if the current deficit is finally brought under control, there will still be the ever increasing burden of Social Security and Medicare as it falls deeper and deeper into the red, and demands more and more IOUs be repaid. 

Eventually even departments will be drastically cut back and perhaps even eliminated.  First in line will be the Department of Education, which was only created in 1980. But other departments will take serious hits as well.  So will the states, as monies to the states are cut back as government continues to strain just to meet the demands of the debt,  Social Security and Medicare.

So the Democrats under Barack Obama may be setting up the country for the paradox of the both the largest increase in federal spending, and the greatest cutback in federal programs in our history.  Anyway you look at it, it will not be a pretty sight.

This is not to say that it will not pass.  It very well may.   Democrats, not Republicans will determine this as Republicans do not even have enough votes for a filibuster.  It is doomed to fail, because it cannot work.  To be clear, it is not that it will not work, it cannot work.

The democrats are claiming that their plan will cover everyone while reducing costs and improving health care.   Now those goals are achievable.  And even the Democratic plan might,  if they are lucky,  achieve two out of the three. But it cannot achieve all three.  To see why, let’s consider the goal of reducing costs.

Set aside what is meant by costs for the moment, there are only two ways to reduce costs.  First, you could simply dictate lower costs.  This can be done in a number of ways, such as reducing the amount paid for individual procedures, or by reducing the number of procedures preformed, or some combination of the two.  While this would certainly reduce costs, it will also negatively affect health care.    This method is how most countries who have government run health care work and is the reason such systems have such long waits. 

The other way to reduce costs is to come up with new and innovative ways to deliver those services.  Granted some of these innovative ways may also lead to a reduced level of health care.  But they could also lead to an improved level of health care, and thereby achieve the goal of improved health care at a lower cost. If the savings were enough, you could also achieve the third goal of covering everyone.  Since innovations can either improve or degrade health care, an additional component is needed to make innovation effective, and that is consumer choice.

The problem is that while politicians often speak of streamlining the process, of cutting out waste and abuse, or other things that could be consider innovations, governments rarely,  if ever, innovates.  In fact governments have a very difficult time of even keeping up with the innovations of market place.  Instead of innovating, they regulate.  Worse, regulations, by their very nature, stifle innovation.  The more regulation you have the less innovation you will have.  In addition, consumer choice is severely restricted as what consumers can choose is restricted to what the regulations will allow.

The health care and health insurance industry is the one of the most heavily regulated sectors in the country.  While there are a thousand health insurance providers in the country, most consumers can at best choose from a handful. So it is not at all surprising that we are in the current predicament of increasing costs and declining service.

The democratic health care plan seeks to solve this by adding over 1000 pages of new laws, which will then be multiplied many times over in the form of implementing regulations.  In short, they will stamp out any remaining vestiges of innovation. 

Democrats counter that they will be supporting competition by including a government option that will increase competition.  This is silly.   For one, the increased regulation will limit innovation and thereby further reduce what little competition there is.  As companies change their plans to conform to the new regulations the plans will look more and more alike and real effective choice will be reduced.  

Even worse,  to be an effective competitor would require the government option be responsive in the market place in a way that is just impossible for government.   In the end,  either the value of the government option to consumers will be so low as to have no effect on the market place, or and far more likely, the value of the government option will be so high as to draw (or have employers force) people into the government option. It will in effect be running the other providers out of business.  So a government option cannot improve competition, it can only hurt it.

Thus the Democratic Health care bill will increase regulation and reduce effective choice even if it doesn’t end in single payer.  While in theory it may be able to reduce cost and expand coverage, it cannot do this while improving health care.  In short, it is doomed. And this is best case. Given the past record of government programs, the actual likelihood is that it will not even be able to control costs and we will be left with worse health-care and even higher costs and a system that is even more difficult to change.

The only real solution is to look to reform that will encourage both consumer choice and competition and thus will spur innovation.  Not only can such an approach work, it has already worked even in the area of health care.  This can be seen in that much of the innovation that has occurred over the last few decades has come from the area of plastic surgery, an area that insurance rarely covers and thus must compete in the market place to exist.

Frank Luntz, discussing his book “What America Really Want … Really” with Dennis Prager Sept 15, 2009 Hour 2 on Prager’s paid site .

Frankly the main justification was found in a different answer to the question Henry asked about the safety of his family and the country.  I do believe those efforts as painful and difficult as they are did in fact make us safer.  I also believe that the current weakening of those efforts by the administration is rapidly undermining the small gains we have made and thereby putting us at much greater risk.

In short I do not believe these were acts of revenge but battles in a larger War on Terror.  I agree that as Christians we should not be acting on revenge, but I just do think that revenge as played a significant role in our actions.