Back to Basics

We’re neck deep in the run-up to Primary Season. On the national scene, the Republican horse-race for the presidential nomination has been something of a circus.  No less than half the field of candidates have had a turn carrying the banner of “front-runner”. This “flavor of the week” elevation and deflation of the candidates is exhausting both to the voters and the office-seekers!  Voters are confused, and “undecided” garners more votes than any single candidate! Primary contests for House and Senate seats and even some lesser state and local offices have been no less contentious and chaotic. There must be a way to make sense of it all and select the best choice of candidate to represent our viewpoints!

In today’s educational and political paradigm, where certain people propose to indoctrinate you with what to think rather than train you how to think – and encourage you to do so; it is difficult to even set a criterion by which to analyze and evaluate the various options.

Therefore, I propose to do just that. I will not promote any particular idea or candidate over another here. This method will work for everyone regardless of your political ideology. It will help you analyze how well a candidate represents YOUR views and interestes – not mine. And it can apply outside of politics. It can, for example, be used in hiring decisions when selecting between candidates for a job!

The candidate should be evaluated against the “6 Ps”: Platform, Positions, Policy, Plan,Past Performance and Personal Integrity and Character.

This will help quantify the major questions you need asked and answered: What are his guiding principles? What’s his philosophy?  How will he approach implementing it? How’s he done in the past? Can I trust him? (Please assign gender neutrality to the male pronouns – it’s tedious to keep specifying him/her)

You want to understand the candidate’s philosophy, his strategic plan, and his tactical plan.

First, you want to understand where the candidate’s coming from. What’s his philosophy? His core values. What are the non-negotiables for him? What’s his motivation? Understanding his Platform and Positions will give insight here. What is he FIRM on, and where is he “squishy”? Is he uncompromising or pragmatic, and in his pragmatism, will he negotiate away YOUR non-negotiables?

Next, you want to understand what he intends to do with that philosophy! What are the Policies he seeks to pursue and what is his Plan to implement them? Does it make sense to you? Does it seem workable to you. Can you support it? Can you understand it?

What’s the candidate’s track record? How’s he done at what he’s attempted before? As any investment’s prospectus will tell you “past performance is not a guarantee of future results”… however it is a pretty good indicator – especially when used to compare between the various choices!

Finally, character counts! As we learned from the Clinton Era, there are those who will support and defend an individual no matter what he does, as long as he espouses their political view. But if we, as a people, don’t hold our leaders to a certain standard of integrity and character, we will all reap the consequences. No matter how rhetorically “pure” a candidate is on the political issues of the day – if he will compromise his personal integrity, there is no reason to believe he’ll hold fast to a political philosophy and not sell it out for self-interest. Therefore, we must demand from our elected officials a higher standard of character.

There are few opportunities for legislation that holds the prospect of gain for EVERYONE who supports it, regardless of party or ideology – but amazingly, the repeal of ObamaCare offers that very opportunity, if our elected officials would but examine the possibilities!!

First and foremost, the majority of America rejects ObamaCare and supports its repeal. So you’ve got popular support. For the Democrats, that majority thing ought to be a biggie. After all, they’re all about direct democracy, aren’t they? Majority rules, right?

But as I’ve been quick to point out on many occasions, not everything that’s popular is right, and not everything that’s right is popular, so let’s look at some other motivations that might move our members of Congress to action.

Dems should consider that ObamaCare is about to undergo a major review by the Supreme Court. Even with Kagan participating and not (properly) recusing herself from the case – there is a very strong possibility that at least some part of ObamaCare will be struck down – if not in its entirety! This would deal a major blow to the party that rammed it through without a single GOP vote, after arm twisting and bribery by Pelosi, generally UNREAD, which had to be PASSED so we could know what’s in it! Not only was it bad law, passed in an unscrupulous manner against the will of the people, but SCOTUS will also give the slap of unconstitutionality to at least part of it. That stings.

Why not get out in front of this and defuse it by repealing ObamaCare and making a SCOTUS review moot?

And likewise, GOP, what if SCOTUS only finds PART of ObamaCare unconstitutional? Do you want to HAVE to live with any part they find legit enough not to strike down? Are you confident that Kennedy will hang tough with the conservatives on the Court ENOUGH to do away with ObamaCare? What kind of mixed bag of upheld and struck down provisions might we have to contend with?

But hey, Republicans, here’s the BEST reason to move on repeal. YOU PROMISED TO! You were ELECTED to! The whole point of the Mid-Term Elections was to put you in a position to. And you’ve forgotten all about it. That will not sit well come primary season!

Back to the Dems. Since you took the reins of Congress in January 2007, we watched the deficit climb from 120 Billion at the end of GOP control of Congress, to nearly 15 times that amount at 1.7 Trillion. We watched the National debt climb from 6 Trillion after 6 years of Bush and 2 wars to nearly 14 Trillion in 4 years of Pelosi/Reid. So whatever Bush Bashing you may do, and however much you seek to blame Bush and say Obama INHERITED his problems… the American People understand that you are the party of spending with reckless abandon. A reality, and a perception you may do well to strive to reverse!

The Super-Committee is charged with finding a Trillion in cuts over 10 years. A pittance! That’s really only 100 Billion a year… and they can’t do it! If the automatic cuts kick in, the military will be slashed, and lefty ideologues aside (as they represent only around 20% of the population) the people of America DO NOT want to see the military slashed by 500 Billion!

The big story in the GOP race for the presidential nomination for the last couple months has been Herman Cain. From his meteoric rise to the top as Conservatives were quickly disenchanted with Rick Perry, to the wall-to-wall coverage of sexual harassment allegations; Herman Cain has been propelled into the public consciousness. So let’s take a look.

Cain’s background is impressive. Born during a time when racial prejudice was the norm, to a mother who worked as a cleaning woman and a father who held down three jobs (janitor, barber and chauffer) just to make ends meet, Cain applied himself to education and earned a degree in Mathematics. Yes, Mathematics – not political science, sociology, or Liberal Arts. The man understands MATH. Probably a good idea for one who seeks the presidency at a time of trillion dollar deficits and massive debt!

From there he went on to earn a Masters Degree in Computer Science. He understands technology – another good idea for one aspiring to lead the nation in the age of tablet PCs, smart-phones, Facebook and Twitter.

Parts of his business career are well known. His legendary leadership of Godfathers Pizza, where his stint as CEO saved the company; and his term on the board of directors at the Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank are fairly common knowledge. His suddenly controversial time as CEO of the National Restaurant Association is also becoming well known.

Lesser known, perhaps, are his service with the Navy, where he designed Fire Control Systems; a time working for Coca Cola, and his Vice Presidency of Pillsbury. He also has a radio program and writes as a columnist.

Cain’s prowess as a businessman is undeniable. He understands markets, economics, problem solving, power delegation, responsibility and accountability. His leadership skills are unassailable.

Political wonks may remember, but it bears pointing out to the public at large that during Herman Cain’s tenure as CEO of the National Restaurant Association, he attended a televised Town Hall meeting where Bill Clinton was defending his proposed healthcare reform, later to be known as “HillaryCare”. Clinton was claiming that his reform would not harm American business owners. Cain spoke up, saying, “Quite honestly, Mr. President, your calculations are incorrect. In the competitive marketplace, it simply doesn’t work that way.”

Cain’s words resonated through the nation, and Newsweek later credited him as the “primary saboteur” of HillaryCare.

Unlike Mitt Romney, Cain has a long history of standing up AGAINST government healthcare. This took place in 2004.

So what of these harassment allegations?

Only Herman Cain and the accusers know exactly what took place… but we can look objectively at what we do know and try to make sense of it.

The allegations were made in 1998. The Restaurant Association settled with the 2 women with one getting around $30,000 and the other around $45,000, according to the Politico. This represented a year’s salary. No civil action was ever brought against Cain personally.

To anyone familiar with business or with the legal system, making a settlement payout, especially one so small – relatively speaking – is certainly not prima facie evidence that an allegation has merit! It’s nuisance insurance. Companies will often settle such claims rather than invest time and expense in fighting off spurious complaints and allegations.

A leftist caller into a morning talk-show that is part of my daily drive was spouting the “no skin off their back” class envy line about the “Buffett Rule” and soaking the rich. Aside from simply annoying me with his ignorance, I found myself realizing that these people who buy into the Class Envy story line will not be swayed by any of the arguments of the unfairness of the excessive tax burden borne by the top income earners. They pull out their “world’s smallest violin” and play “Cry Me a River”. Their attitude is, “They can afford it.” Or, “They’ve still got plenty, AFTER taxes.”

So persuading these people must take another tack. We must convince them of two truths: 1) the so called “Buffett Rule” will hurt not only the rich, but everyone, including them; and 2) The math DOESN’T work!

The big push from the administration is that Capital Gains rates are lower than the Income Tax Rate of the middle class, so they want to raise the Capital Gains Tax Rate. Of course, there is a very good reason Capital Gains are taxed at a lower rate… but that’s not the focus here. Let’s just stick to our two primary premises!

Raising Capital Gains rates affects not only the Wealthy… but EVERYONE who has investment income! If you have an IRA, 401K, Pension, mutual fund or any other investment – it will affect you. Raising Capital Gains tax rates means your retirement fund will not have as big a nest egg for you when you retire. That’s not the fat cats being hurt… it’s YOU, or it’s your PARENTS. It’s the guy who worked hard all his life and seeks to retire and live on the fruits of his labor. The less that a middle class family can acquire toward retirement during their earning years, the more dependent they will be on Social Security or other Government Largesse… which seems to be exactly the goal of the Leftists, and exactly the cause of our economic demise!

The mantra of the Left is that no matter how much the wealthy pay, they aren’t paying their “fair share”. The upper income earners do pay the lions share, shouldering on the order of 70% of the total tax burden while half of America has NO income tax liability and a goodly portion reap a refund they didn’t pay into via refundable credits – meaning that even if they paid NOTHING IN AT ALL they can still get a “refund” (though a “refund” is a misnomer implying return of an OVER PAYMENT! Just how is contributing NOTHING an overpayment?)

According to the latest Government Figures, the earnings total of ALL people in the USA was around 7.8 Trillion Dollars a year.

Government already spends about half of that, with our 3.5+ Trillion Dollar “budget” (well, we haven’t actually PASSED a budget in over 3 years… but that’s a technicality!)

Obama and Co want to raise that level to $5 Trillion, with the Trillion and a Half NEW spending he’s proposing! So, more than 5/8th of ALL MONEY goes thru Government hands??

They scoffed when conservatives warned that the Left sought to take over the entire economy.

There are some on the Right – Mitch McConnell chief amongst them – who fear that the GOP’s stance on principle and against debt and taxes will backlash against them politically.  They are willing to compromise so that they appear to be “reasonable”, and willing to work with the Democrats – as they capitulate to the further destruction of the American economy and to Obama’s “Fundamental Transformation” of who and what we are as a nation!

They are pointing to the Gingrich/Clinton Showdown of late 1995 and early 1996 and the Government Shutdown, which some feel had a detrimental effect on the GOPs popularity and fortunes.  But their memories are faulty and their analysis is flawed!  Let’s analyze the fallout from that showdown!

Please take note of the Federal Debt Chart posted at http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-st-louis/federal-debt-photo.

Notice that our longest stretch WITHOUT a debt limit increase was from 96 to 2001!!  Our 96 Deficit was $107 Billion and after the showdown we had surpluses till 9/11!  In 2000 we had a $236 Billion surplus!

Clinton’s popularity SUFFERED during the shutdown!  The press then hammered Gingrich as a “crybaby”, which his own persona fostered.  GINGRICH’s PERSONAL popularity fell, but the GOP held the house for another 10 years till 2006, and the senate remained in GOP hands all that time except 2000 to 2002!  And we elected BUSH in 2000.

Some folks blame Clinton’s re-election on Gingrich’s showdown at the end of 95 and beginning of 96… but Dole SUCKED as a candidate.  He was the first McCain!  Dole’s defeat was because of DOLE!

In all, the Gingrich/Clinton showdown was extremely good for the country, and not bad for the GOP either!  Gingrich HIMSELF denounces the decision not to blink, because he personally suffered a popularity drop… but his own issues contributed to that loss of popularity, not just the showdown with Clinton!  Today he’s barely moving the needle of presidential candidate popularity… and may run one of the shortest presidential campaigns in history!  CONSERVATIVES have abandoned him because he abandoned them!  Remember his Global Warming Pow-Wow with Pelosi?  He’s gone squishy on a number of Conservative issues!

Some IMPORTANT differences between 1996 and today:

Our national debt in 1996 was under 4 Trillion.  Today it’s 14 Trillion.

Our deficit was $107 Billion.  Today it’s 1.5 TRILLION+.

Spending in 1996 was under $1.9 Trillion.  Today it’s $3.4 Trillion.

In 1996, the American People were not sitting on the edge of economic Armageddon.  In fact, the economy was doing well was about to rev up!  The sleeping giant of American Conservatism was still asleep.  While restraint of government growth was important even then… it was not on the radar of the average-joe American at the time.

What does one TRILLION dollars look like? - U.S. National Debt

Pundits, wonks, politicos and analysts will often toss around a lot of numerical data in making their points or providing their analysis… but they often cite the raw data without realizing that the vast bulk of their audience does not comprehend the numbers and their eyes glaze over! They’re just now starting to grasp the difference between millions and billions, and they haven’t yet inculcated the concept of a trillion into their collective consciousness!

As a public service, I will distill some of the current numerical dialogue into terms that the average citizen should be well able to comprehend and analyze its impact.

Let’s begin with the basics. A million is 1000 thousand. A million dollars will buy between 5 and 8 typical family homes. A million dollars represents about 20 years of earnings for the average family. A million dollars is 10,000 $100 bills. A million dollars will fit into a briefcase.

A billion is 1000 million. A billion dollars in $100 bills would take up 12 shipping pallets stacked 7 feet high. If we round off the population of the USA to 250 Million people, then you would have to take $4 from every man, woman and child to make one Billion dollars. Remember that fact as we will use it in our discussion.

A trillion is 1000 billion. That means a trillion is one million million. Imagine 12,000 shipping pallets stacked 7 feet high with $100 bills. Imagine a 200 car railroad train loaded to capacity with $100 bills! You’d have to take $4000 from every man, woman and child to make a trillion.

Remember, whenever government talks about a billion dollars, think $4 to you. When they talk about a trillion, think about $4000 of your own money.

The worst deficit that Bush had with a GOP congress was in 2003 after 9/11, 2 wars and the dot.com bubble burst. It was around $420 billion dollars. $1680 cost to you.

The 2003 tax cuts did what tax cuts always do, they increased revenues, and the deficit was reduced each of the following years so that by the time power shifted to the Pelosi/Reid congress in January 2007, the deficit had been reduced to under $120 Billion – or $360 to you.

How about the National Debt?

Bush took office with the National Debt of $4 trillion. That’s $16000 debt for you.

In his first 6 years, he added 2 Trillion to the national debt and was harshly and rightly criticized for increasing our debt by 50% in 6 years. This brought our debt to $6 trillion, or $24000 to you.

Pelosi and Reid took the reins of Congress.

Democrats in congress love to beat up on the oil companies: those “evil mega-corporations that make obscene profits and gouge us poor consumers.” But while that populist meme might gain them a few polling points with the assistance of a complicit press, any objective analyst of the facts will have to call BS on the entire premise.

Just where would we be, if the government succeeded in seriously putting the hurt on the world’s few companies capable of taking crude oil and delivering useful products to market?

Forget, for a moment, the energy resources coming from petroleum like gasoline, jet fuel, kerosene, home heating oil and the like. We are dependent upon petroleum for plastics, for medicines, for pesticides, for synthetic fibers necessary to clothe us. For asphalt necessary for roads and roofing. Look at what these demonized companies provide to us, on a slim margin of profit, as we’ll see.

The pain at the pump felt by Americans as gas prices hover around $4.00 a gallon is palpable. And as Rahm Emmanuel famously quipped, the left will “never let a good crisis go to waste”!

Politically, the left sees a golden opportunity: They can attack an “enemy of the common man”. They can (they think) raise tax revenues. They can further cripple the petroleum industry – providing impetus toward their “green economy”. They can attack corporate capitalism. So, of course, they go after the oil companies with great zeal.

But even Democrat Senator Mary Landrieu (a hard core leftist) recognizes that the attacks on the oil companies are both unfounded, and ill advised. Acknowledging that punitively terminating tax provisions (which are available to multiple industries and for good reason!) for the oil companies will not reduce (and might increase) gas prices at the pump, and will NOT increase revenues to the government, she spoke out on May 11, 2011 against the attempts to score political points by setting up the straw-man boogie-man of the “Evil Oil Companies” as an enemy to be taken down.

What REALLY is the cause of these high gas prices? Who’s REALLY to blame?

Well, let’s take a look at the factors influencing our pump price today.

First and foremost is the cost these companies must pay for crude! Raw Material Costs. Presently above $100 a barrel, these costs are bolstered by the weakness of the US Dollar – a function of the poor fiscal policy coming out of Obama’s Washington. A weak dollar means a dollar doesn’t go as far in purchasing commodities on the world market. We can only expect to see commodity prices (of EVERYTHING, not just oil!!!) to continue to climb unless drastic action is taken to stabilize the value of our money!

In addition, we are dependent on foreign (and not always friendly) sources of our oil. Leftist policies have hamstrung our domestic production. When the Department of Energy was created (ostensibly to REDUCE our dependence on foreign oil) our imports represented around 30% of our total petroleum consumption. Presently about 2/3 of all our oil is foreign sourced!