This is one of the most difficult Blogs that I have ever written. It might require more than one to get the point across. If you have read me before, you know that I see most problems as very simple. It is a fact that when a complex problem is finally solved, it always turns out to have a simple solution. People are often fooled because they look for some thing complicated when it is some thing very simple right under their noses. This has been how magicians have been fooling people for thousands of years. Some things never change. I am going to have to take what might look like a detour to get my argument started.
Years ago during the 60's, I was teaching at a major university. It was the start of the Hippi movement and riots on most college campuses. Some were just for drugs and free love, but many had a dark political force behind them. Many wanted to tear down the American system so that a new and "perfect" system could be built in its place. The common thread was to destroy everything that that existed so that they had a clean sheet of paper to build this "perfect" state on. These were strange people for sure. The problem with those idealistic people was that none had ever created anything. In their eyes, every thing was wrong, but they could not explain what was right. In the last election, if I heard this once, I heard it a thousand times from liberals. "I hate Bush and anything is better than Bush". You know that I am a math and science guy and "anything" covers a lot of space compared to the small space occupied by Bush. Only an idiot could make such a statement, and many did. Remember this word, "perfect" because it will come up again. The point I want to make with this short intro is that the political movement of the 60's wanted to destroy the American system because it was not "perfect". Isn't this the common denominator when we refer to a person as being an "idealist"? They are dangerous people and you will see why.
Before I go on, I would like to present another point. It is a common concept in the military that goes like this, "perfect is the enemy of the practical". Kind of simple isn't it? Why is this such a big deal? Think about it. The current liberal movement is all based on the concept that they don't like the current arrangements because they are not "perfect". They have an idea inside their heads of what is "perfect", but they don't know that every other person who seems to agree with them also have an idea in their heads about what is "perfect" too. The problem is that all of these "perfect" ideas are "different". It is like the old saying, "the devil you know may be better than the devil that you wish for". Isn't this sound a little like the situation with Obama. He was the devil that no one knew and now we have him. Did he unify the country or fictionalize it? The answer to that is easy. I once had a Black professor who used the expression, "out of the frying pan, into the fire". It seems that all cultures have had some kind of experience with situations where people did not like the current state of affairs, but were cautious about making major changes. Idealist never consider the possibility that their ideas might be failures and they never consider how they might get back to where they had come from. isn't it interesting when you start connecting the dots? That is what I am going to try to do.
If we start with those ideas from the 60's and see if there are dots that we can now connect, what kind of picture do you think it will paint? These might not be in the order of most important, but they are dots and I will connect them.
Unions-
Where is Obama on unions? He is clearly in their pocket because they were the major factor in getting him elected. If the objective of America is provide the highest quality of living for the greatest number of people, does the power of the unions aid or limit that? My position is that union hurt America for "most" people. It is clear that they help union members initially, but in the limit, they kill the goose that layed the golden eggs. Even kindergartners understood that we should not kill the goose that layed golden eggs. A simple test is to ask what industry is now stronger because of unionisation? Can you think of one? I can't. We used to make our own shoes and now we don't. We used to weave our own cloth, but now we don't. We used to be the largest producer of steel and there was an expression that went,"as goes US Steel, so goes the USA". Remember when we made our own TV sets? Now we don't make any TV sets. Why not? The answer is easy. Unions and Obama is doing everything that he can to support unions. Now ask yourself, "why"? I will come to that.
Coal--
We have more coal than any other country in the world. Our coal has more stored energy than all the know oil in the world. Much of our coal is easy to dig and much of it is high quality low sulfur. Currently we get about 50% of our electricity from coal. All carbon fuels emit carbon dioxide when they are burned. Obama has declared that carbon dioxide is toxic, yet no plant could live without it. Now ask yourself it Obama wants to help the USA, why is he against the use of coal, but has no problem it we ship the coal to China and let them burn it? Strange isn't it? He could be for or against the use of coal and what position has he chosen? Does it make the USA stronger or weaker? You can use the same answer that you used in regard to unions. He could take either of two positions and what is the impact of each? Remember your answers, because we are starting to connect the dots.
Oil--
Take Alaska first. We could either expand the drilling in Alaska or stay the same. Now which position did Obama take? Drill more or drill less? Now let's go the Gulf and see what happened there. We all must know that drilling in very deep water can not guarantee zero risk. We can't design a well that is "perfect" and has zero chances of a spill. We all knew this before the spill, so what is different now after the spill? What does a freeze on further drilling in the Gulf do for the economy of the USA and what position did Obama take? Did he help or hurt our economy? Starting to connect thew dots? Easy isn't it.
Wind Power--
Is Obama for wind power? Does he want to spend your tax money helping people and companies build wind mills? He sure does. Is power from wind mills competitive with any other form of energy? No. If Obama is successful in converting a large percentage of our power over to wind mills, it will make every aspect of our economy less efficient. It will make our economy weaker. Are you having problems connecting thew dots?
Solar Power--
Solar power is "free" from the sun. All we have to do is to go out and collect it. How could it be simpler? It is simple because the USA is one of the dumbest countries in the world when it comes to science and math so it is easy for Obama to spin this one. Is this another dot that you can connect.
Atomic Power--
This one was handed to Obama with the earth quake in Japan. He can say that he is for atomic power and can then do the "rope-a-dope" and stall the building of any new atomic power plants. He can used the EPA or other departments under his control to make life difficult for existing atomic power plants. He can always use the standard argument that we do not have "perfect" atomic power plant designs or safety procedures. Notice that he never has to define what is "perfect". Isn't it interesting how most of the stupid public accepts the "not perfect" logic for almost anything? Connect another dot.
Mexican Border
We all know that we have millions of illegal Mexicans flooding into the USA and we all agree that we should do something. We need an immigration plan. Isn't that right? The problem is that we don't have the "perfect" plan and can't start protecting the border until we have that "perfect" plan in place. The only reason that we don't now have that "perfect" plan is that Republicans and Tea Party people are now helping. Do we now have laws against people coming into the USA without permission? I think we do. So why don't we just enforce the current laws until the "perfect" solution can be perfected? What happened when the state of Arizona tried to help enforce the law? Obama attacked them. He could have accepted the help or attacked the people of Arizona and what did he do? Which position would have helped the economy of the USA? I think you can now connect another dot.
Spending--
Did we just spend a lot of money on GMC? What Obama did was to "save" GMC. That is the spin. What happened to Johns-Mansville when they went bankrupt many years ago?
Don't know? They are the company who had all the asbestos health claims. Remember now? They are still around and were just purchased by Warren Buffet a few years ago. What most people don't know is that most companies that go into bankruptcy don't liquidate. They reorganize and pay a % of their debits and go on. If this were to have happened with GMC, GMC would be better off as would the tax payers today. Who came out ahead compared to a standard bankruptcy? The unions, not the stock holders. Stock holders got zero. Did Obama's decision help or hurt the tax payers of the USA? Ready to connect another dot?
I am getting tired and will pick this up later, I have about 15 more similar dots.
