On the Transition

Recently, while working out at my local YMCA, I was reading the captions on the TV in front of me, which was tuned to CNN. Not my usual choice for news, but my options were non-existent. The commentators were discussing the recent meeting between President Bush, Senator Obama (I've chosen to follow the lead of my Democratic counterparts in 2001, and not call him President-elect), and a few other living presidents. What they found so refreshing was what they referred to as the era of "nice." It was so nice, how gentlemanly Pres. Bush was treating Obama, graciously hosting, even acting as Obama's chief-of-staff in getting the next $350 billion in TARP money to put in Obama's petty cash box. Imagine that, Bush acting nice. I realize that is a novel concept for those on the left who have spent most (if not all) of the last 8 years portraying Bush as anything from an incompetent spoiled rich kid, to a bloodthirsty tyrant in the mold of Adolf Hitler. It must also be novel to them, given the picture we had during the last transition in 2001. At that time, President Clinton was too busy signing a slew of last minute pardons for unrepentant terrorists, convicted profiteers who did business with Iran, and whoever else Hugh Rodham lined up, to notice his staff prying all of the W's off of computer keyboards like a bunch of high school pranksters. Perhaps he couldn't trouble himself with such details while trying to determine which items in the White House he would abscond with.

At any rate, now the liberal media seems quite shocked that Bush is, well, nice. Of course, one individual felt the need to suggest that Obama should not be too nice, as now it is time for him to start the investigations, and that he should be downright mean in punishing anybody from the outgoing Bush administration that they can possibly subpoena. Good to know civility is not dead. Ignore the fact that Bush chose to overlook a myriad of issues with the Clinton administration in their final days. Democrats don't need to be nice.

More entertainment with Obama appointments. His pick for Treasury Secretary (you know, the person who oversees the IRS), Timothy Geithner, seems to have problems with filing taxes. That's right - the potential new taxmaster for all of us can't seem to pay his taxes on time. In 2006, he was audited for tax years 2003 and 2004, and ended up having to pay over $16,000 in back taxes and penalties. Then, AFTER Obama picked him as his Treasury Secretary, he "amended" his 2001 and 2002 returns, paying nearly $26,000 more. The man who will make sure you and I are paying our taxes can't seem to do it properly himself. That's comforting. Will we be given similar grace periods, should we be 7 years delinquent? Nevermind the fact that he also had a housekeeper working for him who had an expired work visa - why is it Democrats have the hardest time with that? And I thought it was the GOP that was the party of the rich elite - why is it that we are always hearing about these housekeepers for Democrats? Honestly, how many does he have on staff, that he can't keep track of things? I'm sure he is in touch with the middle class.

Poor John Kerry - he just can't catch a break. In opening statements for Hillary Clinton's confirmation hearing as Secretary of State, he had to make a point about how dire a situation global warming is. He has about as good of timing on this issue as does Al Gore. The nation was being rocked with frigid temperatures, actual global warming is entering the 10th year of its hiatus, and arctic sea ice has swelled to levels not seen in 3 decades. Does he even pretend to know what he is talking about? He'd better watch out - any more of this global warming, and he might not be able to do any windsurfing out there at Martha's Vineyard.

It looks like the Keynesiacs that are in charge of running our country are drooling at the mouth to drive us further into debt. How many companies have we now bailed out, and how much money has been shoveled in to the economy? What do we have to show for it? And the only answer seems to be, "Well, let's toss in the other $350 billion, then add close to $1 trillion more." It amazes me how many people hear the same tune from Democrats (and, sadly, so many misguided Republicans), and think it is the new hit tune. More money, more money, more money. Democrats have no other answer to solving problems. Kids are failing in schools? Give schools/teachers more money. Not enough people have health insurance? Pour more money in. Social Security is failing? More money. Not enough people have houses? More money. That is their only answer. That and more talks. Talking and shoveling money onto something - that is the sum total of their playbook. Sometimes the two go hand in hand. Consider how the Clinton administration handled North Korea - more talks, and more money, in the form of grain shipments and nuclear reactors. What was the result? Nuclear weapons being tested in North Korea.

The next great new idea for Democrats, as represented by Obama, is to use a failed idea from over 70 years ago to solve our current financial problems. Obama wants a new New Deal. If its all the same, I'd rather not. Remember, the New Deal didn't actually get us out of the Great Depression. In fact, increased spending on infrastructure, as well as isolationism in the form of increased tariffs (similar to Obama's rhetoric) almost certainly drove the depression to be bigger than it needed to be. The New Deal programs, then, served to prolong it. Although it isn't discussed much, there was actually a further recession within the Great Depression, several years into the FDR administration. His New Deal programs were actually discouraging economic recovery by funneling money into government projects that were inefficient and punitive to private companies. It took over a decade to recover - how exactly were those programs effective? One needs only look at the TVA. The areas immediately around TVA controlled areas actually saw a greater increase in prosperity than those supposedly benefited by the TVA. To this day, the TVA is still a money-losing venture. Were it not for the fact that they enjoy greater liberties than any private utilities company is afforded, they would have been driven out of existence long ago.

Wonderful things on the horizon. I just can't wait to see how the next year will unfold.