Obama's lack of leadership

As hard as I am on Obama, I truly do not blame him for his lack of leadership skills. The fact is, his resume showed him community organizing, being a little known state senator, and a US senator, who really didn't lead on any issues. In other words, it was his soaring rhetoric, not leadership ability, that got him elected. So why are conservatives torching him so much for his failure to lead? It's kind of a double-edged sword. We know he's not a leader, yet he wanted a job that by definition is the top leadership job in the world. Go figure! Anyway, here's some areas where is lack of ability to lead has definitely hurt him:

1. Health care Reform- It surely wasn't popular then, at it's surely not popular now. Fact is, Obama said he wanted huge changes in this system, then gave the baton to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi (both VERY unpopular figures in our country) to write legislation on health care. Obama really didn't get involved, which showed by his lack of clarity when he didn't know if many aspects would be in the bill.


2. Libya/Egypt conflicts- In Egypt, he basically sat on his hands without saying anything. On Libya, he waited for France and England to take the lead.


3. Libya continued-- Instead of letting congress know that we were sending cruise missels into Libya, he notified the UN. Breathtaking!


4. Gaddafi- In one swath, Obama said Muammar Gaddifi must go (as in be overthrown). The very next day, he said the United States policy was to NOT overthrow the evil dictator. Fine, but which is it? For some reason, I believe President Bush would have shown more leadership, one way or the other.


5. Failure to shown interest in deficit three times- In the continuing resolution last December, his State of the Union Address, and the last minute continuation of the government from a shutdown last week. In neither case did he mention ways we can get out of our mess.


6. Attacking Paul Ryan's plan during his "fiscal speech", instead of laying out a plan of his own. He didn't give specifics as to how he would reduce our deficit on entitlements, which everyone knows are the big drivers of our debt.


7. Promising to punish the rich with taxes0 He did say that he was going back on last December's passage of the Bush tax cuts. Agree or disagree with lower taxes on the ones who create jobs, he can't have it both ways.

Raising the debt ceiling

Here's Obama's flip-flopping on raising the debt ceiling. Of course now that he's president, he thinks it would be irresponsible for Republicans to vote against the raising of the debt ceiling. Here's what he said on the issue when he was a senator: "The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It's a sign that the US cannot pay its own bills.....Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that "the buck stops here". Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren." Apparently, Obama's minnions are now saying Obama regrets that vote 5 years ago. Ummm, damage done, Mr. President. There are certain things you can regret, but how can you go from principled...... to unprincipled..

Government shutdown and whose fault?

The government may be coming to a shutdown within the next several hours. Of course both sides are blaming the other. But whose fault is it really? I'd go out on a limb and say the 111th Congress (we are in the 112th now). In the 111th congress, they failed to enact a budget. How incredibly disappointing is that? And the kicker is, Democrats controlled the White House, House of Reps, and the Senate. So where's their excuse? It's nice and refreshing to see the House Republicans hold the hard line on having 61 Billion in cuts, which was promised when they were elected in the 2010 landslide. If our government cannot cut 61 Billion (when we are in the whole 1.65 Trillion alone this year), we've got problems. Problems similar to Greece. Finally..... Didn't Obama say that in his first term, he'd reduce the size of the deficit in half? Instead, he's pushed it up another 5 Trillion or so (he's been around 1.5 Trillion each of his three years).

Libya and Obama's response

It isn't really surprising that a President who has such little experience with anything other than teaching and community organizing has everybody confused as to what the Libya mission is.
He has the left ticked that he lifted a finger at all with airstrikes.
He has ticked the right off because, despite many in his administration (including Clinton) saying the time for Gaddafi to go is now with regime change, they are walking back on that statement. I presume because Obama's left flank is throwing a hissy fit because we've used force at all. Nonetheless, can anyone explain the mission coherently?

Finally, he has legislators from the left and the right upset because he thought going to the UN for its approval was more valuable than filling congress in on what he was doing. Oh, he did. But that was without asking for input, and minutes before the strategy was set in motion on the battlefield...

Now just stop and ponder... What if Bush decided not to notify congress of these plans before striking a country? Man, what a scene that would be.

Finally, remember Biden and Obama saying in the 08 campaign that without congressional approval, a US President cannot go to war. Well, I guess Obama's being a hypocrit now! I think the constitution grants the commander these authorities....maybe Obama had a change of heart once Bush left office and he got into office... insert sarcasm here.

My heart is pondering the thought of us having a president who is an actual leader!!!

Gas prices and politics

As most observers will know, presidents probably get too much credit when things are going well. Likewise, they get too much blame when things are not going well. This is so true of the economy. Of course there are policies that may trigger economic output (eg- lower tax rates, less regulation and government interference, etc.).

One of the chief economic (and therefore political) indicators are gas prices. When gas prices get high, who gets the blame? Remember back in the mid 2000's, how the liberal left accused the Bush Administration of having bad energy policy, therefore making gas prices in the 3 dollar range? As I said then, and will say now, there's only so much a president can do to affect gas prices. There are too many factors an American president has no control over that can aversely affect gas prices. The biggest one is global unrest; drilling down further, Mideast unrest. Since so much of the worlds outflow of oil comes from many of these countries, this can cause panic in the markets. Until things stabilize in places such as Libya, gas may even go higher, especially as we start to enter the high drive months of the Summer. A few random thoughts on energy policy, what a president can do, and political fallout:

• Any positive press to the oil markets will drive speculators away. Remember in 08 when President Bush made proclamations of more drilling? The prices went down dramatically in 2 days.
• Any signs of more drilling does more for the psyche of the market short term (ie- more oil will soon come) as well as the long term (ie- actually more supply for our country).
• Moratorium's on drilling KILLS the psyche and therefore drives the speculators to raise prices of oil and bet on the long. Obama did our country or the oil job force no favors by saying no drilling after the oil spill last Spring.
• I'm willing to not blame Obama totally for higher oil prices. He can only do so much with all the tension in the middle east.
• Politically, Obama will be toast in '12 (or at least very vulnerable) if prices remain in the 3-4 dollar per gallon range for gas. The fact is, this affects every industry in our country. Fair or unfair, this would be the political reality.

Defense of Marriage Act

The Defense of Marriage Act, enacted by congress in 1996, and signed into law by President Clinton, is now under assault by Obama and his minnions. So much so that they have promised not to defend "DOMA" in court. Say what???? Just because Obama now thinks DOMA is unconstitutional, he orders his justice department not to defend a law? That's very unusual. How could a president pick and choose what current laws to defend? If that were rational thinking, when Republicans regain the White House, should they not defend Obamacare?

Whatever your opinion is on this matter, it sets a very scary precedent if the executive branch picks and chooses what laws to defend.

Speaking of DOMA, Obama seems to be struggling with this issue. Here's his positions since the 08 campaign:

• He believes that marriage should be between one man and one woman; gays should be entitled to civil unions.
• He believes DOMA is unconstitutional; even though it protects the issue that he says he believes in (defending marriage).

Whatever the outcome, he's surely to piss off huge factions of his liberal base. Since African Americans support DOMA (traditional marriage) by 75 percent, and Mexicans support it by 65 percent; this while his gay base and liberal elites want Obama to do a reverse and allow federal gay marriage. Either way he's boxed himself in. It'll be interesting to see how the liberal media "allows" him to escape this jam he's put himself in.

Why conservatism beats liberalism

In a manuscript I write, I explain why conservatism fits into my view on life, mainly as a Christian. This is the main reason why I vote like I do. But, as Winston Churchill explains, there are very logical reasons to to be conservative:
"If you aren't liberal at age 20, you have no heart; if you aren't conservative at age 40, you have no brain."

Here are some quick reasons why voting for the more conservative candidate always wins:

• School choice- As much as liberals say they are all about choice, they aren't when it comes to schools. Instead, liberals suck on the Unions teet and therefore oppose school vouchers, school choice; as well as rip private schools and home schooling to shreds.
• Abortion- This happens to be the only thing where liberals support "choice". In fact, as more technology proves the point that life begins at conception, public support is now on the side of life. Honestly, liberals support abortion on demand, plain and simple. We have a president who supports partial birth abortion; and is in the tank for Planned Parenthood, Now Organization for Women, is opposed to parental notification. Do I need to go on? Fact is, if you are pro-life, how can you support Democrats?
• Less Government intrusion- Liberals want government more in our lives; conservatives want citizens to make more choices themselves.
• Health Care- Liberals rammed through a mandate where it demands us to buy health insurance or pay a fine. How unconstitutional is that?
• Giving to charity- In every metric polled, conservatives give FAR more to charity in time and money than do liberals. Fact is, conservatives would rather make that decision personally; while liberals would rather FORCE this on citizens through higher taxation.
• Marriage- The Defense of Marriage Act is under assault by liberals again. This, despite around 65 percent of our country believing that marriage should be between ONE man and ONE woman. This doesn't take away rights for gay couples, as they should have rights. But you can't change a definition (or law) based on what a minority of Americans want. For Christians, this shouldn't even be an issue.
• Accountability- Conservatism by and large, serves to the folks who believe in accountability for their actions. Get pregnant, don't kill the unborn. Are you a bad rated teacher? You may lose your job. Commit murder? Death penalty may be the result of taking a life.
• Imminent Domain- Conservatives believe private property is just that... Liberals believe that private property can be taken away by the government if they determine it would be more useful for public consumption (parks, building, etc.).
• Taxation- Despite living in a society where our government spends trillions more than it has, liberals think we still don't tax enough. This despite already living in a progressive system where the higher earners already pay the lions share of taxes... and the poor pay next to nothing.
• Unions v. Business- Liberals support big union because unions ONLY support Democrats. Therefore, they receive sweetheart deals-- pensions, healthcare, wages, in exchange for electing liberal politicians. It's the gift that keeps on giving.... for liberals.