Is this any way to run a country?

From the Heritage Foundation:

According to best estimates, the collapsed Deepwater Horizon oil rig is pumping about 210,000 gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico every day. But don’t worry, President Barack Obama has appointed an “independent” commission to investigate the spill. Our federal government will post an estimated $1.5 trillion budget deficit this year, and our debt is projected to equal 140 percent of gross domestic product within two decades. But don’t worry, President Obama has appointed a debt commission to solve the problem. Our nation’s southern border has degenerated into a violent, lawless and lethal zone. But don’t worry, Congress wants to empower a new commission to control the problem. And millions of Americans don’t know whether or not their health plan will be exempted from Obamacare. But don’t worry, faceless bureaucrats at the Department of Health and Human Services are already hard at work determining whether or not you will be allowed to keep your current health insurance.

Is this any way to run a country? Should the President of the United States be passing off responsibility to “independent” commissions? Should Congress be passing off responsibility for securing our nation’s borders to an unaccountable commission of experts? How is any of this consistent with our nation’s First Principles or the United States Constitution? It’s not.

Read the rest here.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. says

    If that much oil is made unusable everyday, then Obama is probably hanging his feet on purpose. When that oil runs out, he can then have an excuse not to drill off shore any more. No oil, no need for oil rigs.
     
    It’s worth it to him.

  2. suek says

    Remember…”never let a crisis go to waste”…
     
    If the situation is just left alone, it will become worse.  And worse.  At some point – like the Arizona law – people will start screaming “DO SOMETHING!!!”  and if it benefits his agenda, he’ll do something.  But it probably  won’t be what we _want_ him to do…it’ll be something that draws the noose closer, tighter and more like socialism every day.
     
    And then…following the concept of clicking on an ad per day…check this one out:
    http://www.celebritynetworth.com/category/richest-politicians/
    You didn’t _really_ think they wanted to redistribute _their_ wealth, now did you?

  3. says

    Suek, one of the requirements for becoming Citizen in the Freehold by Michael Williamson is that said Citizen must donate the entirety of his net assets to the treasury of said government he wishes to become a Citizen in. In return, he gets powers equal to diplomat, President, judge, etc.
     
     
     

  4. Spartacus says

    One really disturbing thing about Barack is that the same question keeps coming up, and only rarely can the answer be pinned down:  “Is he really that evil, or is he really that stupid?”
     
    On this one, my guess is a fairly straightforward explanation that is closer to “stupid.”  Specifically, the Obami just don’t “do” reality.  Like The One himself, they are politicians, “community organizers,” activists, PR specialists, pollsters, etc..  Actual administration, i.e. putting physical assets into motion to help solve an engineering or other real-world problem, is outside of their experience.  Of course, they have all had experiences in the real world, and many of them are highly intelligent, so why would they not be able to extrapolate based on what they do know about areas outside of politics and make some reasonable decisions?  A combination, I think, of 1) thin-skinned, elitist pride,  2) group dynamics / peer pressure,  and 3) organizational inertia, i.e. being “stuck on stupid.”
     
    A couple of examples.  How many times did Andy Stern visit the White House?  32?  Of course: he’s one of their political buddies.  How many times has Gen. McChrystal visited the White House?  None, last I heard, but he’s waaaaay outside of their little circle, and not someone they really want to talk to.  And rumor has it that Larry Summers and Paul Volcker are occasionally asked for their advice on economic matters, which they give, and which is promptly disregarded as the real economic policy decisions are made by… [drum roll]… Valerie Jarrett.  I’m not a certified fan of Summers or Volcker, but at least they have far more learned and considered opinions on economics than Jarrett.  But such is the arrogance of this crew that it seems more plausible than not.  They are obviously superior to mere technicians; no one among them dares suggest otherwise even if it seems like aparticularly good time to do so; and because that is the pattern they’re used to, it’s not going to change.
     
    So their natural reaction to an oil gusher a mile under the sea floor is to deal with it in a PR / news cycle / election cycle framework.  Those of us who instinctively try to figure out how to stop the oil from coming out may suffer from a failure of imagination in grasping the fact that there are those to whom this approach really and truly does not occur.
     
    Yes, I’m really hypothesizing on this one, but it does seem to fit.

  5. Jose says

    I also am convinced Obama is purposely dragging his feet on the oil spill.  He has already demonstrated he doesn’t support drilling. 

    The longer the oil gushes and the bigger mess it makes, the more he expects public opinion to turn against drilling.  The whole disaster fell right into his hands and he’s not going to waste it.

  6. Danny Lemieux says

    Obama and the Lib Dems wanted us to be just like Europe and, in less-than two years of the Obama administration, they have succeeded: we have double-digit unemployment, stagnant economies, lazy-overpaid technocrat criminals in the governing class and a self-debasing surrender foreign policy.

    “Is he really that evil, or is he really that stupid?”  On this one, my guess is a fairly straightforward explanation that is closer to “stupid.”
    In a normal world, I would tend to agree. However, when we factor in influences like George Soros, Maurice Strong, and Cloward-Piven, I have to consider “evil” as a distinct possibility.

    A couple of examples.  How many times did Andy Stern visit the White House?  32?  Of course: he’s one of their political buddies.  How many times has Gen. McChrystal visited the White House?
    Spartacus, if you look at the recent SEIU lynch mob that was sent to that Bank of America executive’s home, with out-of-jurisdiction police protection from D.C., and all the other SEIU activities around the country, my bet is that SEIU leader Andy Stern was discussing military tactics with Obama. With regard to General McChrystal, remember that, for Liberals, America’s real enemies are domestic. Why talk to General McChrystal when we have Hillary to talk and make nice with all those peopleall over the world that we have wronged for so long. Military stuff is so passe, dontchaknow?

  7. Mike Devx says

    Danny Lemieux #6:
    > if you look at the recent SEIU lynch mob that was sent to that Bank of America executive’s home, with out-of-jurisdiction police protection from D.C.

    If you really think about that statement (out-of-jurisdiction police protection from D.C. participating in this) you realize we truly have stepped through the looking glass, and we are living in Alice’s Wonderland.

    My god, whatever happened to following the law?  To the rule of law?  This is looking more and more like a criminal underworld every day.   Obama and his Executive Branch regularly flout the rule of law, completely ignoring it.  Congress passes bills they won’t read, so they can “find out what is in the bill”.   !!!    The Cheshire Cat surely must be grinning at that one.  On and on it goes.  And no one in the media seems to care that we living in a world where the law is applied only when it is convenient, and ignored elsewhere.

    As one supporter of ObamaCare said, ““I don’t worry about the Constitution on this”

    Another liberal can be quoted: “Conservatives have this weird fetish about the Constitution.”

    They don’t care about the law.  Only about doing “what is right”.  Well, that simply becomes personal judgment, and we are then based on rule by Men (tyranny), not rule by law.  Be careful what you ask for, liberal fellow citizens, because what’s good for the goose, is good for the gander.  Do you REALLY want to head down this road, setting these kind of precedents.  For the shoe will someday be on the other foot.  Do you really want “the other side” following these precedents that you are setting?

  8. Spartacus says

    [sigh]
     
    I normally like sticking to my guns — actually, make that “bitterly clinging” — but I’m also aware that when one finds numerous people whose opinions are all well-reasoned voting the other way, it’s worth going back and re-checking much more carefully.
     
    Danny — I still don’t rule out stupidity, but your mention of George Soros reminded me that our $2 billion loan to Brazil to develop their oil fields is a Soros investment, if I’m not mistaken (which I could be).  Maybe no direct linkage between those two specifically, but not unlikely some ulterior motive somewhere.  Throw in not letting a crisis go to waste, like suek and Jose said, and you’ve got two birds with one stone.  (Still, inaction on a major oil spill could turn into a PR backfire.)
     
    Mike — You are depressingly spot-on.

  9. says

    Stupidity means different things to different people.
     
    Obama and Ivy League Gates would be stupid if you compared them to me in H2H knowledge or ability. But there are other things in life than simply one particular segment or niche. A person that knows one area well, often times is not well versed in another specialized area.

  10. says

    There is this Leftist myth that if you are “brilliant” then this means you are good at any subject. That’s actually not true. It’s a lie they spread across the US in order to elect their One God, the Tyrant that knows all, sees all, and will get everything right, whether using smart politics or a Lowering of the Seas.

  11. says

    “Those of us who instinctively try to figure out how to stop the oil from coming out may suffer from a failure of imagination in grasping the fact that there are those to whom this approach really and truly does not occur..”
     
     
    It did occur to Obama to use federal resources to stop the oil rupture. But that’s exactly why he said it was the Petroleum industry’s problem.
     
    Spartacus is right that Obama is incapable of solving actual problems. He simply makes more of them. But this is only a lack of ability if you want to solve problems. If you want to create problems, then this is super genius. It all depends upon perspective. You can call Obama’s lack of ability whatever you want, but you cannot contest the fact that Obama can get things done. It just won’t be the things you want seen done.
     
     

  12. says

    ” For the shoe will someday be on the other foot.  Do you really want “the other side” following these precedents that you are setting?”
     
    When has there ever been a resurgence on that scale? About the only real example would be the French Revolution, where Robespierre got himself executed by his own Terror Regime he constructed but couldn’t stop.
     
    In Iran, in China, in Cuba, in North Korea, in former Soviet Russia, where has this “backlash” been? Where has the counter-mass graves been? Are they in Iraq when the US moved in and deposed Saddam, to match Saddam’s mass graves of the Shia and Kurds?
     
    No. They know as well as I do, that there will be no counter-offensive to top their human atrocities. There is a very simple explanation.
     
    We can’t build the civilization we envision by following Genghis Khan or Roman ways. A civilization that values individual life, rewards individual initiative, is compassionate about the consequences of unjust laws, and is tolerant of various differences in outlook. But the Left?
     
    They can build a desert and it will be their Peaceful Utopia. They can kill off 90% of the human species and they will have won. But we can’t win that way. This is not something open to interpretation. It is what it is. Their future doesn’t require what we would require of the future, thus the methods available to them are far broader.
     
    This is a pretty basic foundation for why the Left are classified as enemies of humanity, evil in other words, rather than some political faction we simply “disagree with”.

  13. Mike Devx says

    Ymar,
     
    I think it isn’t fair to compare the Obama Administration’s *actions* with human rights violations in “Iran, in China, in Cuba, in North Korea, in former Soviet Russia” and “mass graves”.

    Yes, you have Anita Dunn who, while serving as White House Communications Director, called Mao Tse Tung her favorite philosopher.

    And you have Obama and just about the entire far left cozying up to Zelaya, the Hugo Chavez puppet dictator-wanna-be in Honduras, not to mention turning a blind eye to all the crimes of all these leftist dictators that they cozy up to, including those in “Iran, in China, in Cuba, in North Korea, in former Soviet Russia”.

    And you have Obama’s association with Ayers and Dohrn, who while younger participated in late night bull sessions on the best way to institute their revolution, by way of re-education camps and killing camps for “the enemy”:  millions of Americans who would refuse to go along with their radical revolution in America.   And yes, “The Enemy” for Obama is still only within America, and only comprised of those who disagree with *his* radical transformation of America.

    But none of those equate to the Obama administration instituting the *actions* of death camps and killing fields.

    So when I was speaking of all the precedents that the liberals have decided to go along with, with eyes wide open but mouths firmly shut, I’m talking of all the nefarious and underhanded – and often blatantly in violation of actual laws – all such actions that the Obama Admin is using to  pass and enforce its agenda.

    There could easily be a conservative demagogue come along who is also more than willing to engage in all the same political chicanery and thuggery and law violations, solely to accomplish laudable conservative goals.  (The ends justifying the means and all that…)    Is it possible we conservatives would remain mostly silent the way the liberals are remaining mostly silent, in the face of that?

    If the conservative demagogue keeps succeeding in achieving exciting conservative goals…  and we’ve seen the entire four years of Obama in our past, not just the two years so far…  I think enough of us just might lend silent support as the liberals are doing for Obama.   “It was done to us by Obama, at massive harm to our country”, the thinking might go, “and now it’s our turn.  And our results will SAVE the country.  It’s either do this the ugly way, breaking a few laws and eggs along the way, or its violent revolution with guns to save America.  Better this way.  If it was good enough for Obama, it will simply have to be good enough for us.  We’re saving America!

  14. says

    Whether Obama’s actions are the same as mass graves or not is another subject.
     
     
    What we are talking about is solely focused on the concept of reciprocating. In other words, it is to the benefit to Leftists in this nation not to over step the law because their opponents can do the same thing to them.
     
    I argue that this is an illusion. It is of no benefit to the Left because they get that benefit regardless of whether they over step the rules or not.

  15. suek says

    Just sort of parking this link for the moment – but it’s also an interesting read.  I don’t read FrontPageMag regularly – I suppose I should, but I find their format unfriendly.  Still – it fits under the topic, even if not exactly the application of the topic…
     
    http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=5533
     
    By the way…there seems to be  a significant difference in loading time for the blog between yesterday and today – for me, at least.  Is it something changed with the blog, or just computer/system/internet  gremlins????

  16. Spartacus says

    A caveat.  True, American ideals generally require the absence of bloody retribution, and anyone taking a different path would be seen by the American people with much less legitimacy.  But when history gets to its really interesting chapters, things can quickly take unexpected turns, and those few who were not on the same page with most everyone else may have the ability to make fateful decisions.  What would we have done with Mussolini?  We never found out for sure, since the partisans caught up with him first.  And in 1989, although the top bosses of the Stasi were allowed a peaceful retirement in a reunified Germany, Nicolae Ceausescu was hastily thrown up against a wall and shot by over-eager volunteers on Christmas Day.  Saddam (“The Other Hussein”) Hussein received much more careful and methodical deliberation by a new Iraqi government largely modelled on American governmental principles, but in the end, he came to appreciate more fully the strength of rope.
     
    Ymarsakar, you are mostly right, and lefties who like jackboots can bet with the odds, if they’re even thinking that far ahead.  But even when betting with overwhelming odds, sometimes one loses.

  17. says

    “But even when betting with overwhelming odds, sometimes one loses.”
     
     
    In that situation, everyone loses. Or rather, if that was the only thing happening, if only Mussolini had gotten hanged while the Allies had gotten defeated, then nothing would have changed for the better.
     
    Or if we had conquered them and violence and looting had broken out, we would still have lost because now we would have to fix things. On the other hand, death cults like Islam can kill everybody on this planet and still win by their theology.
     
     

  18. says

    As for Saddam, the price for his death was Sadr’s life as well as the life of a whole bunch of other people we were fighting. Sunnis, Quds force Iranians, and so forth. Saddam’s death was simply a byproduct of victory. He could have died and we still would have lost in Iraq.
     
    The point is, it doesn’t matter whether the Left or Islam is punished in the end. We can only ever use 10% of our total power at any one time, because we’re building a future. It does not matter what evil person gets killed. That doesn’t solve anyone’s problem by itself.
     
    If it was that easy, the Democrat party could be taken care of in a week.

Leave a Reply