Of course the headline above is false and was designed for the sole purpose of drawing attention.
With all the hand wringing and cries of foul over the Republicans analysis of Sen. Obama's relationship with the domestic terrorists William Ayers and his wife Bernadette Dohrn, one might well ask the question, what would be the effect of the above headline have on the McCain campaign? Would it suffice for Sen. McCain to say that the crimes were in the past?
The Obama campaign seems to be bemused and angry that his friendship both personal and professional is beginning to gain traction. As more information surfaces there seems to be serious doubts as to the truthfulness and clarity of the earlier given explanations.
The Weather Underground was not just anti Viet Nam War. A study of the philosophical underpinning of the group expressed by Ayers and Dorhn in 1967 through 1970 and as recently as 2003, reasserted in a BBC interview, reveals that this pair wanted to "destroy America" and "bring the government down through revolution." Ayer's in a speech given in 1968 even called on his followers to murder their parents because they were seen as puppets of the administration.
Obama minimizes his knowledge of Ayers past deeds and opines that there is some nebulous statute of limitation removing culpability for the bombing of American institutions 25 years ago.
It should be pointed out that both Ayers and Dorhn are totally unrepentent and in fact says he wishes he did more.
The major media have seems to accept the Obama rationale and is reluctant to investigate further. Would McCain be granted the same treatment by the main stream media if it came out that he had a similar relationship?
The Edge
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Monday, September 29, 2008
OBAMA WINS, AMERICA SAVED
In view of the many problems on the economic, immigration, energy, healthcare fronts as well as other areas, John McCain should immediately announce the suspension of his campaign through November 4 and concede early to Barrack Obama.
It is clear that once installed in the White House, President Obama will institute programs eliminating all the dire problems facing the country while reestablishing our standing in the world community. It will be wonderful seeing demonstrations in Iran, Sudan, Somalia and Palestine showing their love for America.
According to his "plan" unemployment will be reduced to zero and everyone will get a payraise, except the CEO's who will have to give their ill gotten gains back to the treasury. No one will have to pay taxes, again with the exception of those fat cats in the boardroom.
Illegal immigration will no longer be a problem because the borders will be open to reflect American values of welcoming all who want to come. The Border Patrol could simply be eliminated and the State Dept. passport and visa sections would no longer be necessary. As Obama has taught us, we're all citizens of one world.
Oil exploration could cease as all our energy needs would be met by solar and wind.
And the capstone of the Obama plan will provide that every American will have the best medical treatment for free. Doctors, like the fat cat CEO's will just have to do as VP Biden puts it, "the patriotic" thing and pay the freight in higher taxes. Free healthcare is a right, right?
It's all over but the celebrating. Champagne is being iced, it will be domestic this year.
The edge
It is clear that once installed in the White House, President Obama will institute programs eliminating all the dire problems facing the country while reestablishing our standing in the world community. It will be wonderful seeing demonstrations in Iran, Sudan, Somalia and Palestine showing their love for America.
According to his "plan" unemployment will be reduced to zero and everyone will get a payraise, except the CEO's who will have to give their ill gotten gains back to the treasury. No one will have to pay taxes, again with the exception of those fat cats in the boardroom.
Illegal immigration will no longer be a problem because the borders will be open to reflect American values of welcoming all who want to come. The Border Patrol could simply be eliminated and the State Dept. passport and visa sections would no longer be necessary. As Obama has taught us, we're all citizens of one world.
Oil exploration could cease as all our energy needs would be met by solar and wind.
And the capstone of the Obama plan will provide that every American will have the best medical treatment for free. Doctors, like the fat cat CEO's will just have to do as VP Biden puts it, "the patriotic" thing and pay the freight in higher taxes. Free healthcare is a right, right?
It's all over but the celebrating. Champagne is being iced, it will be domestic this year.
The edge
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
PHONE IT IN SENATOR
The economic crisis has reached such a level that none other than the brilliant investment guru and Obama supporter, Warren Buffet calls it "an economic Pearl Harbor". Democratic senate leader Harry Reid yesterday called the legislative wrangling so divisive that he said without John McCain's efforts he didn't think they could reach agreement on a bailout bill.
After consulting with his economic advisors and having discussions with other senators, John McCain made the decision to suspend all campaign activities in order to return to Washington to work on getting a bipartisan bill passed. He allso said that he felt the debate on foreign affairs should be rescheduled. The Obama campaign eschewed this calling it a "stunt" and saying that "a president must be able to do more than one thing at a time." He went on to say that he would continue campaigning and fund raising and if and when he is needed he will get a call from the democratic leadership. He continued that he saw no reason to postpone the debate.
It may not have ocurred to Sen. Obama that he is collecting a paycheck as one of the senators from Illinois and his first duty is to that position not as a candidate. Although it may be more convenient for senators and members of congress to stay at home and teleconference instead of meeting in person, there is a reason why they come together. John McCain understands that a phone call isn't the same as looking into a person's eye and making an argument for or against a measure and coming to an agreement. It is fundamental to all human interaction.
A "stunt". No Senator Obama, it's called doing your job. You are not President just yet. This is the time to put country ahead of politics or campaigns. As far as the debate goes, it appears you may have lost already.
The Edge
After consulting with his economic advisors and having discussions with other senators, John McCain made the decision to suspend all campaign activities in order to return to Washington to work on getting a bipartisan bill passed. He allso said that he felt the debate on foreign affairs should be rescheduled. The Obama campaign eschewed this calling it a "stunt" and saying that "a president must be able to do more than one thing at a time." He went on to say that he would continue campaigning and fund raising and if and when he is needed he will get a call from the democratic leadership. He continued that he saw no reason to postpone the debate.
It may not have ocurred to Sen. Obama that he is collecting a paycheck as one of the senators from Illinois and his first duty is to that position not as a candidate. Although it may be more convenient for senators and members of congress to stay at home and teleconference instead of meeting in person, there is a reason why they come together. John McCain understands that a phone call isn't the same as looking into a person's eye and making an argument for or against a measure and coming to an agreement. It is fundamental to all human interaction.
A "stunt". No Senator Obama, it's called doing your job. You are not President just yet. This is the time to put country ahead of politics or campaigns. As far as the debate goes, it appears you may have lost already.
The Edge
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
OK, SLOWDOWN AND DON'T FORGET TO BREATHE
The founders created the three branches of government to check and balance the others. They went even further bifurcating the legislative branch into a quick response arm with small constituencies and short terms of office and another arm with longer terms and larger constituencies that was designed to be more deliberative. What we have seen by the Bush administraion this week is an effort to rush the Senate into taking actions against their design. It is irresponsible to violate the basic tenets of the Senate to be intimimidated into enacting a 700 billion dollar funding bill that would turn the American taxpayers in the position of a lender that no credible bank or other lending institution would accept. It's time to apply the brakes, take a breath and work through the serious issue of saving the economy.
The success or failure of any plan to bail out the market is going to depend on its success at stemming the tide of lowering housing prices. Nothing in the proposal even addresses this critical aspect of the economic downturn. Declining house prices, the root of the problem, is to put it simply the result of too many people who cannot afford to live in the homes they are in. Over extended borrowers and their lenders made admittedly as bad bets that housing prices would continue to rise allowing almost unlimited refinancing and debt payoff and reaccumulation in a never-ending spiral. As in all Ponzi schemes, it doesn't take much for the whole house-of-cards to come tumbling down.
If banks and other lenders feel that housing prices will continue to fall, they will be reluctant to make loans even if they have the money. This credit crisis is not addressed in the current proposal. The Senate however is in overdrive in a rush to do something, anything that will appear that they are engaged.
STOP. BREATHE. THINK IT THROUGH. This may well be the most important legislative action of your careers. It is not a time to be rushed into passing a bailout that will only make matters worse.
The Edge
The success or failure of any plan to bail out the market is going to depend on its success at stemming the tide of lowering housing prices. Nothing in the proposal even addresses this critical aspect of the economic downturn. Declining house prices, the root of the problem, is to put it simply the result of too many people who cannot afford to live in the homes they are in. Over extended borrowers and their lenders made admittedly as bad bets that housing prices would continue to rise allowing almost unlimited refinancing and debt payoff and reaccumulation in a never-ending spiral. As in all Ponzi schemes, it doesn't take much for the whole house-of-cards to come tumbling down.
If banks and other lenders feel that housing prices will continue to fall, they will be reluctant to make loans even if they have the money. This credit crisis is not addressed in the current proposal. The Senate however is in overdrive in a rush to do something, anything that will appear that they are engaged.
STOP. BREATHE. THINK IT THROUGH. This may well be the most important legislative action of your careers. It is not a time to be rushed into passing a bailout that will only make matters worse.
The Edge
Thursday, September 18, 2008
WE'RE BROKE BUT IT'S OKE
The dust has yet to settle after the recent disastrous news on the economic front but that hasn't stopped the finger pointing. Candidates, members of congress and media pundits are in danger of putting each other's eyes out playing the blame game.
Democratic leaders in congress are quick to assert that the republicans are at fault for pushing for market deregulation ignoring that the trend toward loosening the restaints began with the Clinton administration and was not halted by a democratically led congress for the past two years. McCain points to a bill he co-sponsored in 2005 warning of the dire consequences of not reining in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that was killed in conference by the dems. He fails however to mention that he once referred to himself as "the great deregulator." Obama has avoided much of the culpability by virtue of having no record on the subject of market regulation or oversight. He has however put McCain on the defensive for opining that the "fundamentals" of the economy is strong.
In the long tradition of politicians locking the barn door after the livestock have fled, are now calling for more regulation and closer oversight. It shouldn't be a surprise that there will be a 9/11 type commission formed that will take a year or so to come up with recommendations providing cover for all the congressional and presidential candidates well through November.
There is little doubt that there needs to be some regulatory changes requiring greater transparency while maintaining the strength of a free market. The one area that has largely been overlooked and according to some high profile investment experts is a financial instrument known as derivatives.
Billionaire Warren Buffet calls derivatives "financial weapons of mass destruction" and refers to them as a "time bomb" and "a fools game". He has spoken often about their introduction making the regulation of margins a joke. This is important because margins, requiring a minimum percentage of capital to be put up by the buyer, is one of the only ways to restrain high risk investments.
There isn't even a consensus of what derivatives are. According to Business 2.0.com, derivatives are defined simply as a "financial security such as an option or future whose value is derived in part from the value and characteristics of another security, the underlying asset."
If that doesn't clear it up, you're not alone. Warren Buffet says he doesn't invest in derivatives because "I don't invest in something I don"t understand."
With all that said, the real problem is that for the most part, these investments, though huge, are basically unregulated and so secret that they are not even listed on the account balance sheets of investment houses like Merrill-Lynch and Bear-Sterns. Congress should take a look at outlawing such fanciful and dangerous intruments.
Will the market right itself? Most experts agree that there will be a period of adjustment but we will survive and in fact prosper. In the short term, 401k, IRA and other investments will suffer and those folks either retired or close to retirement will suffer. The worst thing that could happen however is to over react discouraging all risk taking and making credit unattainable even to those who are worthy.
The Edge
Democratic leaders in congress are quick to assert that the republicans are at fault for pushing for market deregulation ignoring that the trend toward loosening the restaints began with the Clinton administration and was not halted by a democratically led congress for the past two years. McCain points to a bill he co-sponsored in 2005 warning of the dire consequences of not reining in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that was killed in conference by the dems. He fails however to mention that he once referred to himself as "the great deregulator." Obama has avoided much of the culpability by virtue of having no record on the subject of market regulation or oversight. He has however put McCain on the defensive for opining that the "fundamentals" of the economy is strong.
In the long tradition of politicians locking the barn door after the livestock have fled, are now calling for more regulation and closer oversight. It shouldn't be a surprise that there will be a 9/11 type commission formed that will take a year or so to come up with recommendations providing cover for all the congressional and presidential candidates well through November.
There is little doubt that there needs to be some regulatory changes requiring greater transparency while maintaining the strength of a free market. The one area that has largely been overlooked and according to some high profile investment experts is a financial instrument known as derivatives.
Billionaire Warren Buffet calls derivatives "financial weapons of mass destruction" and refers to them as a "time bomb" and "a fools game". He has spoken often about their introduction making the regulation of margins a joke. This is important because margins, requiring a minimum percentage of capital to be put up by the buyer, is one of the only ways to restrain high risk investments.
There isn't even a consensus of what derivatives are. According to Business 2.0.com, derivatives are defined simply as a "financial security such as an option or future whose value is derived in part from the value and characteristics of another security, the underlying asset."
If that doesn't clear it up, you're not alone. Warren Buffet says he doesn't invest in derivatives because "I don't invest in something I don"t understand."
With all that said, the real problem is that for the most part, these investments, though huge, are basically unregulated and so secret that they are not even listed on the account balance sheets of investment houses like Merrill-Lynch and Bear-Sterns. Congress should take a look at outlawing such fanciful and dangerous intruments.
Will the market right itself? Most experts agree that there will be a period of adjustment but we will survive and in fact prosper. In the short term, 401k, IRA and other investments will suffer and those folks either retired or close to retirement will suffer. The worst thing that could happen however is to over react discouraging all risk taking and making credit unattainable even to those who are worthy.
The Edge
Friday, September 12, 2008
ARE THERE COAT TAILS?
When the election season began almost 2 years ago the Republican brand was so tarnished and the anti-Bush sentiment so deep that it was widely reported by the media and conceded even by the GOP that this election cycle would favor democrats. Enter Palin. Defeatist attitudes may be changing.
Congress has an unfavorable rating even below that of Bush. Conventional wisdom is that even when the public dissaproves of congress, they tend to support their congressman. Rumblings are beginning to be felt in even otherwise "safe" democratic districts that so far have been overlooked by the main stream media challenging this bromide and may prove to be significant.
Unable to resist the urge to deify Obama, Tennessee congressman Steve Cohen compared the democratic presidential candisate to Jesus and Sarah Palin to Pontius Pilate. His comments, verging on hysteria underly the unease democratic candidates are feeling and are struggling to shore up their support.
On the Republican side, there seems to be a renewed sense of optimism. Candidates in contested districts, that were merely going through the motions have become energized and are seeing a resurgence in volunteers and donations.
It will be interesting to see if the RNC recognizes this trend and steps up to assist these candidates that had earlier been given up as hopeless.
The Edge
Congress has an unfavorable rating even below that of Bush. Conventional wisdom is that even when the public dissaproves of congress, they tend to support their congressman. Rumblings are beginning to be felt in even otherwise "safe" democratic districts that so far have been overlooked by the main stream media challenging this bromide and may prove to be significant.
Unable to resist the urge to deify Obama, Tennessee congressman Steve Cohen compared the democratic presidential candisate to Jesus and Sarah Palin to Pontius Pilate. His comments, verging on hysteria underly the unease democratic candidates are feeling and are struggling to shore up their support.
On the Republican side, there seems to be a renewed sense of optimism. Candidates in contested districts, that were merely going through the motions have become energized and are seeing a resurgence in volunteers and donations.
It will be interesting to see if the RNC recognizes this trend and steps up to assist these candidates that had earlier been given up as hopeless.
The Edge
Thursday, September 11, 2008
SPEAK SOFTLY BUT CARRY A BIG LIPSTICK
There are certain catch phrases that have taken their place in the general usage to the point that they become a sort of short hand. Putting lipstick on a pig is one of those ubiquitous aliterations requiring no explanation. Why, then was there such a reaction when Sen Obama used the phrase in discussing the economic policies of his opponents.
What if Obama had said in describing his primary opponents policy "you can dress a pig in a pants suit but it would still be a pig." Would it have raised a few eyebrows?
The point is that certain words become associated with individuals. After her acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in which she ad libbed the pitbull and lipstick joke, she has, at least in the short term co-opted the word. As an astute politician, it is surprisingly myopic of Obama and demonstrates a lack of situational awareness that is telling.
Whether Obama was consciously alluding to Palin is unclear but it is evident that his audience made the connection. The real story is that it seems the Palin factor has the Obama-Biden campaign bemused and in dissarray. If they can't get back on track, the cosmetic makeover of livestock may be the least of their problems.
The Edge
What if Obama had said in describing his primary opponents policy "you can dress a pig in a pants suit but it would still be a pig." Would it have raised a few eyebrows?
The point is that certain words become associated with individuals. After her acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in which she ad libbed the pitbull and lipstick joke, she has, at least in the short term co-opted the word. As an astute politician, it is surprisingly myopic of Obama and demonstrates a lack of situational awareness that is telling.
Whether Obama was consciously alluding to Palin is unclear but it is evident that his audience made the connection. The real story is that it seems the Palin factor has the Obama-Biden campaign bemused and in dissarray. If they can't get back on track, the cosmetic makeover of livestock may be the least of their problems.
The Edge
Monday, September 8, 2008
BROTHER, CAN YOU SPARE SOME CHANGE?
Even the most casual observer of the presidential race will note that a common theme has emerged. In a word, "change". It has become so ubiquitous as to lose it's impact. It is reminiscent of children repeating a word over and over again to the point when the word not only loses its distinctive sound but also its meaning. A careful reading of both candidate's websites and speeches may lead to a better understanding of what each candidate means when they talk about change. Policy changes have been getting the lion's share of exposure and while they are important, what is being overlooked is the systemic problems that are the root cause of many of the problems facing the citizenry.
While both candidates have offered some policy initiatives, the Obama campaign has focused on comprehensive healthcare and tax reforms but is less specific on immigration, energy and national security issues which have been the foundation of the McCain platform. Only McCain seems to have a track record of and a plan for tackling the Washington DC establishment and the way things are done.
Sen. McCain joined with democratic Sen. Feingold in a two year effort resulting in the first campaign funding reform in fifty years and promises to continue if elected to eliminate the so-called 527 groups that currently are able to raise unlimited funds to support candidates. Examples of 527 organizations are Move-on on the far left and the right wing Swift Boat group that targeted Kerry in the last election cycle. McCain would also eliminate "earmarks" a method legislators use to hide expenditures for special interests in otherwise un-related bills. Additionally, he would also limit the ability of former members of congress and the senate to accept employment with lobbying groups and even writing bills that are then offered up for consideration by a sitting member.
Policies are an important consideration when determining which candidate to support but without addressing the systemic issues nothing much will really change.
The Edge
While both candidates have offered some policy initiatives, the Obama campaign has focused on comprehensive healthcare and tax reforms but is less specific on immigration, energy and national security issues which have been the foundation of the McCain platform. Only McCain seems to have a track record of and a plan for tackling the Washington DC establishment and the way things are done.
Sen. McCain joined with democratic Sen. Feingold in a two year effort resulting in the first campaign funding reform in fifty years and promises to continue if elected to eliminate the so-called 527 groups that currently are able to raise unlimited funds to support candidates. Examples of 527 organizations are Move-on on the far left and the right wing Swift Boat group that targeted Kerry in the last election cycle. McCain would also eliminate "earmarks" a method legislators use to hide expenditures for special interests in otherwise un-related bills. Additionally, he would also limit the ability of former members of congress and the senate to accept employment with lobbying groups and even writing bills that are then offered up for consideration by a sitting member.
Policies are an important consideration when determining which candidate to support but without addressing the systemic issues nothing much will really change.
The Edge
Friday, September 5, 2008
I WAS WRONG! WAS THAT SO HARD?
After a secret meeting with Roger Ailes, the head of Fox in which he was promised "fair" treatment, Sen. Obama appeared on the Factor for a one on one interview with the newly reformed curmudgeon Bill O'Reilly. The first segment was broadcast on Thursday night in a questionable time slot just prior to Sen. McCain's acceptance speech at the RNC.
Bill O'Reilly began the questioning by allowing that in his opinion, the democratic candidate had been proven right in his pre-war opposition to the invasion of Iraq. The host then asked why his guest refused to acknowledge the success of the change in strategy known as "the surge". Obama reluctantly said that the surge had succeeded "far beyond anyone's expectations" but when pressed to take the next step and admit that he was wrong in opposing the increase in troops, he suddenly got very nervous and resorted to evasion, ultimately refusing to make any admission.
It should be pointed out that John McCain made the original argument for the new strategy against his own party even challenging Bush ultimately convincing him to allow Gen. Petraeus to implement his counter-insurgency plan. McCain not only predicted success but risked his political career on it. It was during this period that he answered critics with the statement that,"I would rather lose an election than lose a war."
McCain was also faced with a similar situation of being on the wrong side of an issue when he joined with democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy to co-author a comprehensive immigration bill aimed at approaching border security as well as path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. When he was faced with an uproar demanding border security first, he went before the microphones and made a very simple statement. " I realize that the American people, with good cause, do not trust the government on this issue and demands border security first. I get it. I was wrong and will now place border security as the first priority."
Is America better served by a leader who acknowledges mistakes or one who stubbornly refuses to do so?
The Edge
Bill O'Reilly began the questioning by allowing that in his opinion, the democratic candidate had been proven right in his pre-war opposition to the invasion of Iraq. The host then asked why his guest refused to acknowledge the success of the change in strategy known as "the surge". Obama reluctantly said that the surge had succeeded "far beyond anyone's expectations" but when pressed to take the next step and admit that he was wrong in opposing the increase in troops, he suddenly got very nervous and resorted to evasion, ultimately refusing to make any admission.
It should be pointed out that John McCain made the original argument for the new strategy against his own party even challenging Bush ultimately convincing him to allow Gen. Petraeus to implement his counter-insurgency plan. McCain not only predicted success but risked his political career on it. It was during this period that he answered critics with the statement that,"I would rather lose an election than lose a war."
McCain was also faced with a similar situation of being on the wrong side of an issue when he joined with democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy to co-author a comprehensive immigration bill aimed at approaching border security as well as path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. When he was faced with an uproar demanding border security first, he went before the microphones and made a very simple statement. " I realize that the American people, with good cause, do not trust the government on this issue and demands border security first. I get it. I was wrong and will now place border security as the first priority."
Is America better served by a leader who acknowledges mistakes or one who stubbornly refuses to do so?
The Edge
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)